Can You Bring a Guillotine onto the Ice?

I’m just gonna let the uniform number speak for itself in this picture:

link

The Nebraska football uniform evolution states that the team wore Shimmel jerseys in the late ’70s and into the ’80s. What is a Shimmel jersey?

Cowboys’ old field at Texas Stadium had royal blue trim, but their new field has navy blue trim. …

You guys must have terrific eyesight. I can’t even begin to identify what color the cheerleaders are wearing.

Any of you geeks see this?

link

He makes a REAL good point!

RE: Cowboys Stadium

You know, I noticed that almost immediately back in August, but it never occurred to me to point it out here. Does that make me a bad uniwatcher?

[quote comment=”351003″]The Nebraska football uniform evolution states that the team wore Shimmel jerseys in the late ’70s and into the ’80s. What is a Shimmel jersey?[/quote]

A Schimmel is a jersey with the bottom of the body cut off. Doesn’t tuck into the pants. You remember the look, I’m sure.

—Ricko

[quote comment=”351012″]Nebraska QB Turner Gill in a Schimmel…
link

—Ricko[/quote]

That’s hot.

[quote comment=”351014″][quote comment=”351001″]I’m just gonna let the uniform number speak for itself in this picture:

link

I’m sure Paul could have a field day with modern roller derby uniforms. There’s a heavy DIY ethic in derby, so you do get a lot of non-conformity within the same team. The numbers don’t have a set pattern; for example, on my men’s team, we have a few odd numbers: 24601, A1, *25, and i.

Oh, yeah, and I’m number 767, and skate under the name Killsbury Doughboy.[/quote]

I like the one with the name Knockturn Ali, which is a reference to Harry Potter. Well Played.

[quote comment=”351009″]RE: Cowboys Stadium

You know, I noticed that almost immediately back in August, but it never occurred to me to point it out here. Does that make me a bad uniwatcher?[/quote]

Me, too.

[quote comment=”351014″][quote comment=”351001″]I’m just gonna let the uniform number speak for itself in this picture:

link

I’m sure Paul could have a field day with modern roller derby uniforms. There’s a heavy DIY ethic in derby, so you do get a lot of non-conformity within the same team. The numbers don’t have a set pattern; for example, on my men’s team, we have a few odd numbers: 24601, A1, *25, and i.

Oh, yeah, and I’m number 767, and skate under the name Killsbury Doughboy.[/quote]

Now this here is Roller Derby, yessir…
link

Wanna have some laughs? Watch that aptly named “bomb” sometime.

—Ricko

I hate to pee all over your sponsors, Paul, but looking at their site for the drawing – does the level of gay-bashing bother anybody else?

[quote comment=”351022″]I hate to pee all over your sponsors, Paul, but looking at their site for the drawing – does the level of gay-bashing bother anybody else?[/quote]
Since I can’t edit, “gay bashing” isn’t really the best word choice. But using “gay” and “homo” as slurs isn’t really on, is it?

[quote comment=”351025″][quote comment=”351019″][quote comment=”351014″][quote comment=”351001″]I’m just gonna let the uniform number speak for itself in this picture:

link

I’m sure Paul could have a field day with modern roller derby uniforms. There’s a heavy DIY ethic in derby, so you do get a lot of non-conformity within the same team. The numbers don’t have a set pattern; for example, on my men’s team, we have a few odd numbers: 24601, A1, *25, and i.

Oh, yeah, and I’m number 767, and skate under the name Killsbury Doughboy.[/quote]

Now this here is Roller Derby, yessir…
link

Wanna have some laughs? Watch that aptly named “bomb” sometime.

—Ricko[/quote]

Try this link…
link

Or just watch the trailer there. That’s probably enough. LOL

Hey Chance, then you’d really love Tshirthell.com

Any way, I was at the Jets game Sunday and saw someone wearing an Future Jets 80’s Namath Jersey…this is so wrong!!

[quote comment=”351023″]Wow, some particularly misogynistic and homophobic shirts over there at Sports Crack. Stay classy, you guys.

In non-offensive-asshole news, I’m surprised Eric Louis-Seize doesn’t wear #16.[/quote]

Which shirts are you referring to?

[quote comment=”351011″][quote comment=”351003″]The Nebraska football uniform evolution states that the team wore Shimmel jerseys in the late ’70s and into the ’80s. What is a Shimmel jersey?[/quote]

A Schimmel is a jersey with the bottom of the body cut off. Doesn’t tuck into the pants. You remember the look, I’m sure.

—Ricko[/quote]

Thanks, Ricko. I remember the look well, and always thought that it was damn cool, particularly if a t-shirt was worn under the jersey. Somehow I missed that it was called a Schimmel, though. (I hang my head in shame.)

[quote comment=”351019″][quote comment=”351014″][quote comment=”351001″]I’m just gonna let the uniform number speak for itself in this picture:

link

I’m sure Paul could have a field day with modern roller derby uniforms. There’s a heavy DIY ethic in derby, so you do get a lot of non-conformity within the same team. The numbers don’t have a set pattern; for example, on my men’s team, we have a few odd numbers: 24601, A1, *25, and i.

Oh, yeah, and I’m number 767, and skate under the name Killsbury Doughboy.[/quote]

Now this here is Roller Derby, yessir…
link

Wanna have some laughs? Watch that aptly named “bomb” sometime.

—Ricko[/quote]

I love “Kansas City Bomber.” The DVD occupies a prominent place in my collection and in my heart.

[quote comment=”351034″]Shit, now I see that one of the less tasteful tees is on the mirror site as well.

That’s it, I’m gonna cancel their ad and cancel the raffle.

Thanks for pointing this out, guys.[/quote]

Good on you, Paul. To show you my gratitude, I’m buying a Uni Watch membership in support of tolerance and equality.

[quote comment=”351029″]Would have been fun to see this Raider uni for the 50th celebration.
link

Basically the Bears uni in Steeler colors.

All the Raiders had FNOB in ’60, which that has to be cuz was only year Parilli was in Oakland. Was raded to Boston in the off season. In ’60 he shared the Raider QB job with an unknown from Pacific, some kid named Tom Flores.

“Traded”? When was the last NFL trade that involved active players actually switching teams? Moss to Oakland, maybe?

—Ricko[/quote]
This comes to mind.

Damn.

link.

[quote comment=”351039″][quote comment=”351029″]Would have been fun to see this Raider uni for the 50th celebration.
link

Basically the Bears uni in Steeler colors.

All the Raiders had FNOB in ’60, which that has to be cuz was only year Parilli was in Oakland. Was raded to Boston in the off season. In ’60 he shared the Raider QB job with an unknown from Pacific, some kid named Tom Flores.

“Traded”? When was the last NFL trade that involved active players actually switching teams? Moss to Oakland, maybe?

—Ricko[/quote]
This comes to mind.[/quote]

Not exactly sure what the question is, but Jon Kitna for Anthony Henry?

[quote comment=”351034″]Shit, now I see that one of the less tasteful tees is on the mirror site as well.

That’s it, I’m gonna cancel their ad and cancel the raffle.

Thanks for pointing this out, guys.[/quote]

good on you

ya gotta admit, tho…the “hide your beagle — vick’s an eagle” shirt was classic

the others, particularly the questionable ones…not so much

[quote comment=”351047″][quote comment=”351034″]Shit, now I see that one of the less tasteful tees is on the mirror site as well.

That’s it, I’m gonna cancel their ad and cancel the raffle.

Thanks for pointing this out, guys.[/quote]

good on you

ya gotta admit, tho…the “hide your beagle — vick’s an eagle” shirt was classic

the others, particularly the questionable ones…not so much[/quote]

LOL! I was hoping I would win the raffle so I could get that shirt..

[quote comment=”351047″][quote comment=”351034″]Shit, now I see that one of the less tasteful tees is on the mirror site as well.

That’s it, I’m gonna cancel their ad and cancel the raffle.

Thanks for pointing this out, guys.[/quote]

good on you

ya gotta admit, tho…the “hide your beagle — vick’s an eagle” shirt was classic

the others, particularly the questionable ones…not so much[/quote]

For the sake of argument (I know, unusual here) I’d like to keep things in perspective by quoting one of our great philosophers, Mike Tyson: “If you don’t like it, turn off your station”.

from Chad Ochocinco’s twitter
OGOchoCinco I’ll be wearing all pink gloves, shoes and wrist bands in support of breast cancer awareness throughout the Month of October

[quote comment=”351037″][quote comment=”351034″]Shit, now I see that one of the less tasteful tees is on the mirror site as well.

That’s it, I’m gonna cancel their ad and cancel the raffle.

Thanks for pointing this out, guys.[/quote]

Good on you, Paul. To show you my gratitude, I’m buying a Uni Watch membership in support of tolerance and equality.[/quote]
I just bought a t-shirt from link, and specifically mentioned their ad here.

Is it just me or do the Oilers original helmets and unis from the ’60s look like they used a much darker blue than what the Oilers are using this season in their AFL throwbacks? The AFL throwbacks look more like the baby blue of the 70s – 90s Oilers, to me.

[quote comment=”351053″]from Chad Ochocinco’s twitter
OGOchoCinco I’ll be wearing all pink gloves, shoes and wrist bands in support of breast cancer awareness throughout the Month of October[/quote]

way to ruin a good lookin uni

Nike gets a conscious?

link

Mr. Johnson’s latest kicks…..

link

[quote comment=”351063″]Mr. Johnson’s latest kicks…..

link
I don’t know how to feel about this. The only sensible comment on there is this one:

Dude wtf is this ; c’mon SON! Why y’all lyinq deez UGLY !

[quote comment=”351045″][quote comment=”351040″][quote comment=”351034″]Shit, now I see that one of the less tasteful tees is on the mirror site as well.

That’s it, I’m gonna cancel their ad and cancel the raffle.

Thanks for pointing this out, guys.[/quote]

Paul,

I’d like to applaud you for that. I find the shirts in poor taste, but I can handle them. At the same time i’m not sure there is really any place for a Homo shirt regardless of what other teams fans call tony romo.

the fact that you asked them to create a mirror site and they still couldn’t comply with your request is just bad business on their part.[/quote]

In hindsight, I should have insisted that they stop selling the less tasteful product altogether as soon as I became aware of it, instead of having them create a mirror site. My bad for not having done that.

Thanks again for speaking out on this — much appreciated.[/quote]

Paul, this has nothing to do with the above topic, but I sent you an email relevant to your hockey article that’s due on ESPN. You may want to peek at it before the article has run.

[quote comment=”351069″][quote comment=”351052″][quote comment=”351048″]It isn’t the most recent, but Clinton Portis for Champ Bailey comes to mind.[/quote]
Jay Cutler for Kyle Orton.

It’s the link I fucked up in my original reply to Ricko and then re-linked like 2 comments after that.[/quote]

Ah, yes, how could I forget Orton for Cutler.
Either way, such things don’t happen often these days.

Thanks for waking me up. LOL

—Ricko[/quote]

Rick,
are you talkin player for player? or prime player for prime player?

I am about 99% positive that those Olympiakos socks are the same, but the one player simply has his twisted around so that it isn’t lined up on the leg correctly. Its just an issue with the way the player is wearing it. In the top picture, the player with his back to us is wearing them correctly, as is the player facing us in the bottom picture. The player with his back to us in the bottom picture simply has his socks twisted around. Also, you cannot see the Puma logo on his sock because he has folded the sock over at the top.

[quote comment=”351074″][quote comment=”351060″]Welcome to the USA in the 21st century… thanks to liberals, democrats and this president’s administration people are offended by a T-shirt… but other ones on the same site are equally stupid and childish which the fearless leader likes… typical[/quote]

So true. Up until Obama came along, you could walk around with a “Kill the Homos” tee — in Greenwich Village, even! — and nobody would bat an eye. But the White House personally called me and asked me to take down the SportsCrack ad, and I caved under their socialist mind-control tactics.

True, every word of it.[/quote]
No, no, no, no, no, no, no! You’ve got it all wrong. Everything that’s ever been wrong with this country can be attributed to Bill Clinton.

ocho pinko?

Does anyone know why my Uniwatch page shows up in generic HTML format now? I don’t know what happened, but it’s only on my home computer. I tried resetting the browser, checked for updates on everything, I dunno. It really sucks because it’s must less enjoyable to look at now and has subsequently demoted me from an avid daily reader to a casual two-three times a week browser.

[quote comment=”351083″][quote comment=”351081″][quote comment=”351078″][quote comment=”351074″][quote comment=”351060″]Welcome to the USA in the 21st century… thanks to liberals, democrats and this president’s administration people are offended by a T-shirt… but other ones on the same site are equally stupid and childish which the fearless leader likes… typical[/quote]

So true. Up until Obama came along, you could walk around with a “Kill the Homos” tee — in Greenwich Village, even! — and nobody would bat an eye. But the White House personally called me and asked me to take down the SportsCrack ad, and I caved under their socialist mind-control tactics.

True, every word of it.[/quote]
No, no, no, no, no, no, no! You’ve got it all wrong. Everything that’s ever been wrong with this country can be attributed to Bill Clinton.[/quote]

LOL
Was just gonna post….

Let’s make it easy.
“Everything wrong,
in the whole freakin’ world,
is the fault of President (current or former president),
who is really Satan, btw,
and those goddamn (his party).”

There, now just fill in the parentheses based on your political leanings…and we’ll be done.

—Ricko[/quote]

The most important word there is “done.” Let’s move on.[/quote]

My point exactly.

So if pink is okay for Ocho Cinco, what’s so horrible about Neon Green on the Seahawks? I know, I know, wasn’t for a “cause”. Was just for fun. Can’t have THAT.

—Ricko

[quote comment=”351085″][quote comment=”351080″]link?[/quote]

I think you’re a smidge too bright…but… god it’s going to be an ugly October.

I still don’t see how this is possibly a good idea. Hell, paint a big pink ribbon on the field if you want, but pink shoes and gloves and anything else on the players is just bad.[/quote]

Gloves, shoes, etc., pretty much up to individual players, isn’t it?
They’re neither being told TO do such things or NOT to do such things, correct?

So it’s a wideout being flashy. Nothing new there (see: Lennie Moore, spatted shoes, mid 50’s or so).

—Ricko

[quote comment=”351089″][quote]So if pink is okay for Ocho Cinco, what’s so horrible about Neon Green on the Seahawks? I know, I know, wasn’t for a “cause”. Was just for fun. Can’t have THAT.[/quote]

i bet shirts vs. skins would be “fun” too

and who says pink on the uniforms, in this case accoutrements…is good?

i didn’t hate the neon greens as much as i was prepared to, and as long as that uni is one and done, fine

why doesn’t the NFL just, say, give a shitload of money to breast cancer research and be done with it? oh that’s right, they have to pat themselves on the back first

pink gloves, pink sweats, pink shoes?

c’mon…this shit is just ridiculous[/quote]

Hey, I get it now! The Browns brown pants are for Irritable Bowel Syndrome Awareness…a malady that is, appropriately enough, exacerbated by the Great Mangini’s coaching and people management skills.

—Ricko

Never said I liked the pink, just making sure the dismay was over the differentiation from team colors and not about the color itself.

Also was saying a WR seizing an opportunity to go overboard and draw attention to himself is to be expected.

(Said the skinny split end who constantly got shit from coaches back in ’62 and ’63 because he taped his shoes, LOL)

—Ricko

Just out of curiosity, is there any team (any sport) that you guys can think of where pink would be a GOOD complementary color to the scheme already in place. I’m thinking something that’s already red, but who knows. Anybody have an idea?

-Greenie

Wasn’t pink a secondary, or even tertiary, color for the Spurs back in the 80’s? Black, silver, pink … or maybe my memory is colorblind.

Rather than a red team, I would suggest a team with a dark navy, black, or dark green primary color. Red and pink clash, in my opinion.

[quote comment=”351096″]Wasn’t pink a secondary, or even tertiary, color for the Spurs back in the 80’s? Black, silver, pink … or maybe my memory is colorblind.

Rather than a red team, I would suggest a team with a dark navy, black, or dark green primary color. Red and pink clash, in my opinion.[/quote]

Hell, Fiesta Spurs of the mid-90s

[quote comment=”351094″]Just out of curiosity, is there any team (any sport) that you guys can think of where pink would be a GOOD complementary color to the scheme already in place. I’m thinking something that’s already red, but who knows. Anybody have an idea?

-Greenie[/quote]

No, not really. I could see a baseball team using pink similar way that some teams use powder blue.

Pink can work as a uniform color, but it’s gotta be designed that way. Magenta worked for the Sun in old WFL.

[quote comment=”351099″][quote comment=”351097″][quote comment=”351094″]Just out of curiosity, is there any team (any sport) that you guys can think of where pink would be a GOOD complementary color to the scheme already in place. I’m thinking something that’s already red, but who knows. Anybody have an idea?

-Greenie[/quote]

Q & D, and probably link…

care to ID the sport you had in mind andrew?[/quote]

Actually, that was the only team in my mind. I couldn’t get the image out so i figured i’d ask around for others.[/quote]
link that I think works nicely.

[quote comment=”351079″][quote comment=”351054″]I don’t mean to pile on and at the risk being accused of being naive, I have been troubled by the sports betting ad that appears on Uniwatch.[/quote]

Actually, there are several betting ads on the site — we’ve had them around for about two years now. I was wondering if anyone would ever comment on them, and to my knowledge this is the first time anyone has.

I know some people think betting is evil or offensive. Personally, I think it’s more silly than anything else, but I don’t think there’s anything wrong with it. Yes, some people have gambling problems, but some people also have drinking problems — doesn’t mean I wouldn’t run a Yuengling ad if that company came calling (which seems unlikely, but still…).

Anyway: We all know what betting is. If you’re into it, feel free to patronize our betting sponsors; if not, ignore their ads (which should be easy enough, since they’re all plain text ads — not display ads like our other sponsors). They mainly run those ads to boost their google search status anyway — they don’t much care if you click on them or not.

The SportsCrack situation was trickier, because you could go to their site and stumble upon offensive material without realizing what you were getting into. I’m no longer comfortable being associated with their product, so that relationship is now over.

Anyway: If anyone has a major problem with the betting ads, feel free to speak up — your feedback on this topic is welcome.[/quote]

I noticed the betting ad a while ago. I never bother to say anything, but once the SportsCrack topic came up i decided to chime in.

The difference I see betwen a betting ad and a Yuengling ad is if my 15 tear old nephew were to decided he wanted a beer he would still have to go to a liquor store and purchase it. Hopefully most liquor stores would realize he’s 15 and not sell it to him even if he did have a fake ID. The gambling ads make it easy for teenagers to gamble and get in way over their heads. Especially since it’s probably pretty easy to gamble even if one is underage.

Sure 44 year old men like you and I for the most part understand all about gambling and either go to the sports betting site or not. A lot kids think it’s cool and don’t fully understand the pitfalls of gambling.

This was posted on the Scout Broncos board, by user cubuffintx, which would quite possibly explain the brown helmet decal. Any merit to this claim? :

“I have a book called “Barely Aubible” and the orange and blue was a complete mistake by the Uni company. they had ordered uni’s almost exactly like the Cle. Browns colors (old color, burnt orange or something similar) they were going to the colored jersey with the stupid looking bucking horse logo (they wore them on monday night in Buffalo in the mid-90’s) and when they opened the boxes they were UF Gator orange. There was no time to have them re-made so the blue and orange was born, by total circumstance.”

[quote comment=”351103″][quote comment=”351100″][quote comment=”351094″]Just out of curiosity, is there any team (any sport) that you guys can think of where pink would be a GOOD complementary color to the scheme already in place. I’m thinking something that’s already red, but who knows. Anybody have an idea?

-Greenie[/quote]

No, not really. I could see a baseball team using pink similar way that some teams use powder blue.

Pink can work as a uniform color, but it’s gotta be designed that way. Magenta worked for the Sun in old WFL.[/quote]

Are you sure about that…..

link
(Stade Francais, French Rugby Union team) They have had several interesting pink tops[/quote]

Here is a video of their club shop (not too sure if it can be viewed in US though), player also tries to explain some of the shirts

[quote comment=”351108″][quote comment=”351103″][quote comment=”351100″][quote comment=”351094″]Just out of curiosity, is there any team (any sport) that you guys can think of where pink would be a GOOD complementary color to the scheme already in place. I’m thinking something that’s already red, but who knows. Anybody have an idea?

-Greenie[/quote]

No, not really. I could see a baseball team using pink similar way that some teams use powder blue.

Pink can work as a uniform color, but it’s gotta be designed that way. Magenta worked for the Sun in old WFL.[/quote]

Are you sure about that…..

link
(Stade Francais, French Rugby Union team) They have had several interesting pink tops[/quote]

Here is a video of their club shop (not too sure if it can be viewed in US though), player also tries to explain some of the shirts[/quote]

link

damn……

[quote comment=”351106″]This was posted on the Scout Broncos board, by user cubuffintx, which would quite possibly explain the brown helmet decal. Any merit to this claim? :

“I have a book called “Barely Aubible” and the orange and blue was a complete mistake by the Uni company. they had ordered uni’s almost exactly like the Cle. Browns colors (old color, burnt orange or something similar) they were going to the colored jersey with the stupid looking bucking horse logo (they wore them on monday night in Buffalo in the mid-90’s) and when they opened the boxes they were UF Gator orange. There was no time to have them re-made so the blue and orange was born, by total circumstance.”[/quote]

Looks like it is pretty cheap

link

[quote comment=”351100″][quote comment=”351094″]Just out of curiosity, is there any team (any sport) that you guys can think of where pink would be a GOOD complementary color to the scheme already in place. I’m thinking something that’s already red, but who knows. Anybody have an idea?

-Greenie[/quote]

No, not really. I could see a baseball team using pink similar way that some teams use powder blue.

Pink can work as a uniform color, but it’s gotta be designed that way. Magenta worked for the Sun in old WFL.[/quote]

Kinda of an exercise in futility. In western culture, pink is seen as feminine (with the possible exception of men’s golf shirts), so getting a team here to wear pink as regular thing would be tough. Isn’t so much that way worldwide, but in U.S., yes.

Maybe a WNBA team? If Charlotte had a team choosing its name (as most in that league do) to relate to the NBA team, could be the Charlotte Pink Panthers. Ooo, think of the commercial tie-ins.

—Ricko

—Ricko

[quote comment=”351114″]Maybe a WNBA team? [/quote]

been there

The original Calgary Hitmen jerseys were black and grey with pink accents, basically using Bret Hart’s colours. After he sold the team, they kept the name and logo but went to a red and copper scheme with more conventional striping.

link

[quote comment=”351080″]link?[/quote]
Based off his comments, it’d be more like this:

link

He wants to wear a pink chin strap & mouth guard as well.

[quote comment=”351113″](Stade Francais, French Rugby Union team) They have had several interesting pink tops)

Also Palermo, in the Italian Serie A (pink and black).[/quote]
Palermo? I though it was Juventus (away kit).

I’ve always been offended by the Naming Wrongs shirts, but I’ve never said anything.

[quote comment=”351091″][quote comment=”351088″][quote comment=”351085″][quote comment=”351080″]link?[/quote]

I think you’re a smidge too bright…but… god it’s going to be an ugly October.

I still don’t see how this is possibly a good idea. Hell, paint a big pink ribbon on the field if you want, but pink shoes and gloves and anything else on the players is just bad.[/quote]

Gloves, shoes, etc., pretty much up to individual players, isn’t it?
They’re neither being told TO do such things or NOT to do such things, correct?

So it’s a wideout being flashy. Nothing new there (see: Lennie Moore, spatted shoes, mid 50’s or so).

—Ricko[/quote]

I’d prefer flashy with team colors over flashy and pink.

I’m sorry, but the whole thing just seems really empty to me. I’m all for cancer research, but I just don’t see any point at all in the pink thing. Wearing pink, or red… or any other color is nothing more than an empty symbolic gesture. You’re a player making 5 million dollars a year.. you want to help cancer research? Donate 100k. That’ll do a lot more than wearing pink gloves on TV.

Same for the pink fan merchandise. If the NFL wants to donate a percentage they earn on sales to charity – great. But there’s no way in hell I’m ever buying or wearing a pink Raiders shirt.[/quote]

Jeff’s in the running for comment of the day.

[quote comment=”351105″]Paul,

Not to be a nitpicker here but where do you find the offensive shirts on Sportscrack.com? I don’t see any “Kill the Homos” or anything like that on there. All I see is some play of words that a lot of people including myself find humorous.

I’m kind of offended you are offended. It’s a t-shirt. Get over it.[/quote]

You know, it says something when a shirt containing the word “homo” is considered unspeakably offensive, but a shirt about “Purple Jesus” isn’t. It just goes to show you that there’s still one group that’s fair game for ridicule: straight, white, Christian males.

By the way, I’m not offended by either shirt. I just thought it was revealing to see what people consider offensive and what they don’t.

[quote comment=”351007″]Any of you geeks see this?

link

He makes a REAL good point![/quote]

While I don’t agree with everything he says, he does make a good point about too many teams only using the colors from the cheap box of crayons. There are many colors in the spectrum, many of which can be utilized to create quality, distinctive looks. And yet, it seems that whenever a team tries something from the 64 color crayon pack, they inevitably get ridiculed by those who assume everything new is bad, and are forced to go back to the small crayon box.

[quote comment=”351128″][quote comment=”351105″]Paul,

Not to be a nitpicker here but where do you find the offensive shirts on Sportscrack.com? I don’t see any “Kill the Homos” or anything like that on there. All I see is some play of words that a lot of people including myself find humorous.

I’m kind of offended you are offended. It’s a t-shirt. Get over it.[/quote]

You know, it says something when a shirt containing the word “homo” is considered unspeakably offensive, but a shirt about “Purple Jesus” isn’t. It just goes to show you that there’s still one group that’s fair game for ridicule: straight, white, Christian males.

By the way, I’m not offended by either shirt. I just thought it was revealing to see what people consider offensive and what they don’t.[/quote]
I’m not offended by anything on that site, but “Purple Jesus” is used in a positive manner, whereas “Volunqueers”, “Gaytors”, “Cowgirls/Homo”, etc. are clearly used derisively.

whenever a team tries something from the 64 color crayon pack

Oops, guess there is one other group that’s fair game for ridicule, after all!

[quote comment=”351135″][quote comment=”351131″]
Well, technically speaking, Jesus was a straight white guy, so that would be a historically accurate shirt.[/quote]

link?[/quote]
Ah, but there’s one thing we can all agree on. Jesus was all about the pussy.

[quote comment=”351138″][quote comment=”351135″][quote comment=”351131″]
Well, technically speaking, Jesus was a straight white guy, so that would be a historically accurate shirt.[/quote]

link?[/quote]
Ah, but there’s one thing we can all agree on. Jesus was all about the pussy.[/quote]

say what?

[quote comment=”351133″][quote comment=”351124″]there’s still one group that’s fair game for ridicule: straight, white, Christian males.[/quote]

Who are purple.[/quote]

No, see, that just proves my point. You don’t even understand why “Purple Jesus” might be offensive in the first place. It has nothing to do with the “purple” part, it has to do with comparing someone’s God to a sporting figure.

But like I said, neither shirt offends me in the least. I’m not the type to be offended by a tshirt. I just think it’s funny how people can be so offended about one thing, but completely oblivious to something else that’s just as offensive.

Wasn’t he a straight Jewish guy?

And wasn’t his robe, the one the Roman soldiers rolled dice for, purple?

Which is also, I suppose, why purple is the color for Easter?

Asking. Just seems to me that’s the story.

—Ricko

[quote comment=”351142″][quote comment=”351133″][quote comment=”351124″]there’s still one group that’s fair game for ridicule: straight, white, Christian males.[/quote]

Who are purple.[/quote]

No, see, that just proves my point. You don’t even understand why “Purple Jesus” might be offensive in the first place. It has nothing to do with the “purple” part, it has to do with comparing someone’s God to a sporting figure.

But like I said, neither shirt offends me in the least. I’m not the type to be offended by a tshirt. I just think it’s funny how people can be so offended about one thing, but completely oblivious to something else that’s just as offensive.[/quote]

Jesus wasn’t even the guy’s real name… so… yeah. Purple Jesus = Vikings Savior. It works.

the jesus pic is the painter’s uncle

kelly & gold jesus?

[quote comment=”351151″]link?[/quote]
link

the people who bitch and moan are the ones that disagree with the disagreers

[quote comment=”351142″][quote comment=”351133″][quote comment=”351124″]You don’t even understand why “Purple Jesus” might be offensive in the first place. It has nothing to do with the “purple” part, it has to do with comparing someone’s God to a sporting figure.[/quote]

Amen. And I’ll bet if there was a “Purple Mohammed” shirt there would be a huge uproar.

No matter what your religions are, I don’t think any of them should be trivialized like this, even if they’re used in a positive sense. That’s why I bristle every time I hear someone use the term “the football gods.” Enough already.

Paul was right to do what he did, but AP also has a point.

[quote comment=”351130″][quote comment=”351007″]Any of you geeks see this?

link

He makes a REAL good point![/quote]

While I don’t agree with everything he says, he does make a good point about too many teams only using the colors from the cheap box of crayons. There are many colors in the spectrum, many of which can be utilized to create quality, distinctive looks. And yet, it seems that whenever a team tries something from the 64 color crayon pack, they inevitably get ridiculed by those who assume everything new is bad, and are forced to go back to the small crayon box.[/quote]

He’s not understanding the history of things. PMS computer color matching technology is relatively new. In U.S. sporting history from the 20’s through the ’60s, suppliers offered a limited palette of standard colors. “You want blue that’s not navy or royal, that’s gonna cost you extra.” Texas, Tennessee, Redskins, Columbia and a few others wore uni colors you couldn’t order from a typical sporting goods catalog.

So, certain colors just came to be thought of as sport uniform colors. Yeah, the Crayola box was pretty small, but those were, by god, what uniforms were supposed to look like.

Back then there was Orange in the catalogs. Period. Not Tennessee Orange, Orange and Texas Orange.

Or Red. 49ers, Reds, Red Sox, Cardinals (baseball and football), St. Louis Hawks, Phillies, Nebraska and others all wore the same color until the 70’s. That’s when the variations began to become commonplace. Also, teams began to prosper, so the addiitional expense wasn’t an issue.

Just sayin’, can’t blame teams for not being too much for variety. A certain palette is kind of “socially imprinted.”

Which is why I like the Neon Green. Or the WFL Sun’s magenta, for that matter. In Crayola terms, definitely “outside the box.”

—Ricko

This whole offensive t-shirt controversy has basically been settled the same way as how the NFL justifies moving a Jets game earlier in the day to avoid a Jewish holiday while the league will schedule games on Christmas Eve or Christmas Day without a second thought.

[quote comment=”351079″][quote comment=”351054″]I don’t mean to pile on and at the risk being accused of being naive, I have been troubled by the sports betting ad that appears on Uniwatch.[/quote]

Actually, there are several betting ads on the site — we’ve had them around for about two years now. I was wondering if anyone would ever comment on them, and to my knowledge this is the first time anyone has.

I know some people think betting is evil or offensive. Personally, I think it’s more silly than anything else, but I don’t think there’s anything wrong with it. Yes, some people have gambling problems, but some people also have drinking problems — doesn’t mean I wouldn’t run a Yuengling ad if that company came calling (which seems unlikely, but still…).

Anyway: We all know what betting is. If you’re into it, feel free to patronize our betting sponsors; if not, ignore their ads (which should be easy enough, since they’re all plain text ads — not display ads like our other sponsors). They mainly run those ads to boost their google search status anyway — they don’t much care if you click on them or not.

The SportsCrack situation was trickier, because you could go to their site and stumble upon offensive material without realizing what you were getting into. I’m no longer comfortable being associated with their product, so that relationship is now over.

Anyway: If anyone has a major problem with the betting ads, feel free to speak up — your feedback on this topic is welcome.[/quote]

I’ve always thought it looks a little strange and cheapens the site a tiny bit- but I’m certainly not offended in any way.

Then again, I’m rarely offended by anything.

I always take the “its his site, not mine- and he has to pay the bills, while I get free content” attitude.

I always take the “its his site, not mine- and he has to pay the bills, while I get free content” attitude.

I’ll bet a lot of your readers feel this way.

Statistically speaking, I believe white straight males are now a minority in the U.S.

Not arguing for or against anything, Just saying that makes it one of those strange “perception” things.

And this, btw…
“the NFL justifies moving a Jets game earlier in the day to avoid a Jewish holiday while the league will schedule games on Christmas Eve or Christmas Day without a second thought.”
…is an EXTREMELY valid point.

Although, to be honest, what they’re REALLY saying is “Jews take their holidays much more seriously than Christians, so we’d better move the game to keep TV ratings numbers up.”

At it’s core, it’s about money, not tolerance or respect for someone else’s faith.

—Ricko

[quote comment=”351162″]Paul was right to do what he did, but AP also has a point.

This was his original premise:

It just goes to show you that there’s still one group that’s fair game for ridicule: straight, white, Christian males.

If you agree with that, then I disagree with you both. On this site everyone and everything has been fair game. And if you aren’t fair or game, I think you’re missing something.
Now can we talk about tomorrow’s Caps-Bruins game?

:)[/quote]

I agree all people are fair game. Where I was saying he had a point was that people’s dieties of choice shouldn’t be considered fair game. That’s all.

Now about those Caps and Bruins…ah, I got nothin’. It’s curling season for me…

[quote]those were, by god, what uniforms were supposed to look like[/quote]

ok, now im offended

[quote]This whole offensive t-shirt controversy has basically been settled the same way as how the NFL justifies moving a Jets game earlier in the day to avoid a Jewish holiday while the league will schedule games on Christmas Eve or Christmas Day without a second thought[/quote]

maybe they should stop scheduling christmas on a sunday then

~~~~~~~~~~

on a serious note — i agree about moving the jets game…that was bullshit…my PIP sucks and i decided not to DVR the giants game, so i had to flip channels

good thing the giants kicked the everliving shit out of the bucs, or there would have been real hell to pay

im more pissed off about not getting the seahawks game at all than about moving the jets game tho

jeebus, where’s the NFL’s consideration of my uni-centric views? biggest game of the season and i can’t see it???? frankly that’s more offensive than any of those damn t-shirts

[quote comment=”351159″][quote comment=”351130″][quote comment=”351007″]Any of you geeks see this?

link

He makes a REAL good point![/quote]

While I don’t agree with everything he says, he does make a good point about too many teams only using the colors from the cheap box of crayons. There are many colors in the spectrum, many of which can be utilized to create quality, distinctive looks. And yet, it seems that whenever a team tries something from the 64 color crayon pack, they inevitably get ridiculed by those who assume everything new is bad, and are forced to go back to the small crayon box.[/quote]

He’s not understanding the history of things. PMS computer color matching technology is relatively new. In U.S. sporting history from the 20’s through the ’60s, suppliers offered a limited palette of standard colors. “You want blue that’s not navy or royal, that’s gonna cost you extra.” Texas, Tennessee, Redskins, Columbia and a few others wore uni colors you couldn’t order from a typical sporting goods catalog.

So, certain colors just came to be thought of as sport uniform colors. Yeah, the Crayola box was pretty small, but those were, by god, what uniforms were supposed to look like.

Back then there was Orange in the catalogs. Period. Not Tennessee Orange, Orange and Texas Orange.

Or Red. 49ers, Reds, Red Sox, Cardinals (baseball and football), St. Louis Hawks, Phillies, Nebraska and others all wore the same color until the 70’s. That’s when the variations began to become commonplace. Also, teams began to prosper, so the addiitional expense wasn’t an issue.

Just sayin’, can’t blame teams for not being too much for variety. A certain palette is kind of “socially imprinted.”

Which is why I like the Neon Green. Or the WFL Sun’s magenta, for that matter. In Crayola terms, definitely “outside the box.”

—Ricko[/quote]

Yeah, I totally understand that it’s only recently that custom colors have become readily available and affordable. And I totally understand that we’ve been culturally conditioned because of that to only accept a certain standard palette for uniforms.

My only point is that now that we can explore new palettes and distinctive colors, we should be open-minded enough to allow teams to experiment with new things with instinctively ridiculing it for being different.

The statue on Chris Masons mask is a statue of Louis XVI (our namesake) that stands outside of the St. Louis Art Museum in Forest Park.

link

[quote comment=”351170″]At it’s core, it’s about money, not tolerance or respect for someone else’s faith.

Hey, they played 2 days after the President was assassinated.[/quote]

They sure did. I was getting ready to go to Lions at Vikings when—what the hell?—some guy in a hat gunned down Lee Harvey Oswald right there in front of me on TV.

I decided it was better to stay home and watch history happen.

—Ricko

Why should the Rangers should have an exclusive on the diagonal insignia?

Should the Yankees have an exclusive on pinstripes?

[quote comment=”351164″]Today’s ESPN column is up (it would have been ready sooner, but I threw in some last-minute Jesus references just so AP could feel a little more persecuted):
link

As you’ll see, the column has a new logo. But it’s actually the WRONG new logo. It’s supposed to be this:
link

They’ll swap in the right one shortly.[/quote]

Dude, not cool. I even went out of my way to point out (several times) that I’m not personally offended in the least by Jesus jokes. I was just making an observation about the double standard people have when it comes to what’s offensive.

[quote comment=”351176″][quote comment=”351161″]This whole offensive t-shirt controversy has basically been settled the same way as how the NFL justifies moving a Jets game earlier in the day to avoid a Jewish holiday while the league will schedule games on Christmas Eve or Christmas Day without a second thought.[/quote]

Actually, they do have a little consideration. There’s never been a night game on Christmas Eve, as far as I can recall.[/quote]

I believe Vikings had a 3 p.m. CT start on Christmas Eve in the past few years. Think was against Packers. That’s about as close as they’ve come.

—Ricko

[quote comment=”351177″][quote comment=”351170″]At it’s core, it’s about money, not tolerance or respect for someone else’s faith.

Hey, they played 2 days after the President was assassinated.[/quote]

They sure did. I was getting ready to go to Lions at Vikings when—what the hell?—some guy in a hat gunned down Lee Harvey Oswald right there in front of me on TV.

I decided it was better to stay home and watch history happen.

—Ricko[/quote]

Conversely, the AFL did not play.
BTW, that Showtime show is on tonite (today is Wednesday, isn’t it)?

Not to mention the totally sexiest idea of a
PURPLE NURPLE
shirt for women.

That’s just disgusting.
(How’d I do? Did I sound like Joe Buck?)

—Ricko

[quote comment=”351187″]Not to mention the totally sexiest idea of a
PURPLE NURPLE
shirt for women.

That’s just disgusting.
(How’d I do? Did I sound like Joe Buck?)

—Ricko[/quote]

did you mean sexiest (as written) or sexest?
either way, humorous

You trying to tell me that Jesus Christ can’t hit a curveball?!

[quote comment=”351188″][quote comment=”351184″][quote comment=”351178″][quote comment=”351169″][quote comment=”351162″]Paul was right to do what he did, but AP also has a point.

This was his original premise:

It just goes to show you that there’s still one group that’s fair game for ridicule: straight, white, Christian males.

If you agree with that, then I disagree with you both. On this site everyone and everything has been fair game. And if you aren’t fair or game, I think you’re missing something.
Now can we talk about tomorrow’s Caps-Bruins game?

:)[/quote]

I agree all people are fair game. Where I was saying he had a point was that people’s dieties of choice shouldn’t be considered fair game. That’s all.[/quote]

He had no point at all! The “Purple Jesus” shirt was intended to be a COMPLIMENT! If any mention of Jesus in contemporary culture offends you, well, good luck with that, but the idea behind the shirt was POSITIVE. Compare that to shirts with slogans like “GAYtors” and “VolunQUEERS” and “Tony Homo” — those are NEGATIVE, dig? They are meant to be nasty — nasty toward a certain fan base, and nasty toward gay people. If you’re not offended by them, great, no problem, but don’t try to conflate those shirts with the Purple Jesus shirt. They have nothing in common.

Incidentally, I’m the guy who wished everyone a happy Yom Kippur the other day by writing, “Happy High Heeb Holy Days (and only one person got upset about it — guess he doesn’t know about link), so let the record show that Jews are persecuted around here too. Equal opportunity![/quote]

You never answered my question. If the shirt had said “Purple Allah” or “Purple Mohammad” would you still feel the same way? I’d wager that you would have considered that offensive and pulled it right away.[/quote]

Actually, no, I’d have no problem with those. But it’s a false choice anyway, because those shirts WOULDN’T MAKE SENSE, because Mohammad and Allah aren’t iconic figures in American culture. Calling Brett Favre “purple Allah” leads to “Wha..?”; calling him “purple Jesus” is a straightforward metaphor, because he’s the Vikings’ savior.

I don’t think it’s a particularly brilliant or funny metaphor, incidentally. But the logic behind it is simple enough. And, again, it’s POSITIVE. Pretending that this is a “double standard” compared to the “VolunQueers” is beyond willful on your part.[/quote]

No, but once again, you don’t understand why people might be offended by the shirt in the first place. See, for many Christians, comparing a sports figure (no matter how positively) with their God is offensive. Comparing ANY ordinary human being with their God is offensive, especially when done in a irreverent way, comparing Jesus’ salvation with the salvation of a football team.

I get the shirt. For the millionth time, I’m not offended in the least by the shirt. My only point is that for many people (not me) making a Jesus joke (whether the intent is supposed to be complimentary or not) is just as offensive as a vagina or gay joke. I think it’s an interesting commentary on our culture that people don’t see how that could even be possible.

[quote comment=”351192″][quote comment=”351178″][quote comment=”351169″][quote comment=”351162″]Paul was right to do what he did, but AP also has a point.

This was his original premise:

It just goes to show you that there’s still one group that’s fair game for ridicule: straight, white, Christian males.

If you agree with that, then I disagree with you both. On this site everyone and everything has been fair game. And if you aren’t fair or game, I think you’re missing something.
Now can we talk about tomorrow’s Caps-Bruins game?

:)[/quote]

I agree all people are fair game. Where I was saying he had a point was that people’s dieties of choice shouldn’t be considered fair game. That’s all.[/quote]

He had no point at all! The “Purple Jesus” shirt was intended to be a COMPLIMENT! If any mention of Jesus in contemporary culture offends you, well, good luck with that, but the idea behind the shirt was POSITIVE. Compare that to shirts with slogans like “GAYtors” and “VolunQUEERS” and “Tony Homo” — those are NEGATIVE, dig? They are meant to be nasty — nasty toward a certain fan base, and nasty toward gay people. If you’re not offended by them, great, no problem, but don’t try to conflate those shirts with the Purple Jesus shirt. They have nothing in common.

Incidentally, I’m the guy who wished everyone a happy Yom Kippur the other day by writing, “Happy High Heeb Holy Days (and only one person got upset about it — guess he doesn’t know about link), so let the record show that Jews are persecuted around here too. Equal opportunity![/quote]

Why are you putting words in my mouth? “If you’re not offended by them, great, no problem”?

I never said I wasn’t offended. I even said you did the right thing. I even agreed that the Jesus shirt was intended as a compliment. I never said the shirts were equally offensive. That’s why I didn’t complain about them. So yeah, I dig. Doesn’t mean I think it’s appropriate.

I have no problem with the “Jesus is my homey” shirts I’ve seen, or other ones like that. I just don’t like it when we start calling people a savior or a messiah. In that particular case I think AP DOES have a point.

Whatever.[/quote]

three words: link

It just goes to show you that there’s still one group that’s fair game for ridicule: straight, white, Christian males.

Petitio Principii

this would make a great t-shirt

How ’bout we each have two of these…
link
…AND lighten up.

—Ricko

So, I’m going to the Packers/Lions game on Oct. 18th (my birthday), and I was just looking up the game day promotion for fun,and saw it was this:
Giveaway Item
Gold Pom-poms with pink strands

Followed by the Special Game Day Feature:
Packers Women’s Association Food Drive and NFL Breast Cancer Awareness Month

And of course, halftime entertainment:
Oneida Nation Performance -Breast Cancer Awareness theme

How in the world can you have a halftime show with Breast Cancer Awareness theme? Oh well, let the pink madness begin. Even at Lambeau… *sigh* Not that I don’t like it, or am against it. Just as long as it isn’t overdone.

And did anyone find that list of players wearing pink this week yet?

[quote comment=”351150″]I’m watching the Red Wings vs. Farjestad BK on NHL.tv… the team is NOB, but the Farjestad goalie is NNOB. Also looks like they got some extra uniform numbers from the Anaheim Ducks.[/quote]

It’s gotten weird across the pond. The second goalie for Farjestad is in the game for the third period, and he’s got TCNOB: tape covering name on back.

In 2005 when Christmas was on a Sunday the NFL scheduled 13 games for Saturday, played 2 on Sunday and 1 on Monday night.

A couple of notes on the goalie masks in Paul’s article, and some that were missed:

– The Corvette imagery on the Craig Anderson’s mask. He’s a huge racing fan, and the image if “Jake”, the ‘Vette mascot, was added to both the Yeti and to his back plate.

– Chris Mason’s back plate has his daughter’s name, Avery, inside a massive axe. Mason is a huge video game fan, specifically the God of War game. The axe, I assume, has to do with him being a warrior in the nets. I have no explanation of the McArthur portion yet, but it may be his wife’s maiden name.

– Tampa Bay’s newest goaltender in camp is former Flyers goalie Antero Niittymaki. Niittymaki had a fairly unique design while in Philly with link shown on the side. “Nitty” is, of course, Niittymaki’s nickname. Well, he didn’t stray far in Tampa Bay. He simply changed the colours to link, and stuck with the Nitti theme on his helmet. Nitty is now Tampa Bay’s gangster.

– Islanders goaltender Dwayne Roloson is sporting some new paint. Here is the link, the link, and the link to his mask. I like the buoy on the back plate. Very cool idea. I was hoping for the Fisherman to show up on a mask, but looks like he won’t be making an appearance this season.

I think that’s all. :o)

[quote comment=”351202″]Question about the new Khabibulin mask in Paul’s ESPN article: Look at the Oilers logo on the forehead. There’s a clock outline superimposed on the logo with hands of a clock. I can’t tell the exact time due to the size of the picture but it looks like it’s either 5:05 or 1:25 depending on which clock hand is which.

Any idea what this stands for? (and the correct time of course)[/quote]
1.25 or 5.05 are my best guesses for Khabibulin’s GAA, depending on which incarnation of him shows up in Edmonton…

[quote comment=\”351150\”]I\’m watching the Red Wings vs. Farjestad BK on NHL.tv… the team is NOB, but the Farjestad goalie is NNOB. Also looks like they got some extra uniform numbers from the Anaheim Ducks.[/quote]

I saw that too. It looks like the took the whole uniform template from the Ducks, and switched green for black. My picture isn\’t good enough to see the details on their uniforms. It\’s weird watching a game without any commentary at all. I\’m so used to play-by-play following the action, I don\’t really know what to do without it.

[quote comment=”351174″]The statue on Chris Masons mask is a statue of Louis XVI (our namesake) that stands outside of the St. Louis Art Museum in Forest Park.

link
If I recall correctly, St. Louis was named for Louis IX, not Louis-Seize, errr….XVI

[quote comment=”351210″][quote comment=”351202″]Question about the new Khabibulin mask in Paul’s ESPN article: Look at the Oilers logo on the forehead. There’s a clock outline superimposed on the logo with hands of a clock. I can’t tell the exact time due to the size of the picture but it looks like it’s either 5:05 or 1:25 depending on which clock hand is which.

Any idea what this stands for? (and the correct time of course)[/quote]
Not sure about the time, but link. It looks like it’s about 5:05 to me.

His Blackhawks mask was link.[/quote]
I’m starting to think there’s no real significance to where the hands are positioned, but that they’re just set so as not to overlap the logo as much as possible. Tampa Bay: looks like it was at about link.

[quote comment=”351212″]Re: Khabibulin mask.

Did a quick Google search (should have done that first) and apparently he’s had a clock tower on his masks in Chicago and Tampa too and it’s a depiction of the Saviour’s (Spasskaya) Tower at the Moscow Kremlin. As for the time depicted, still no luck as to any specific meaning.[/quote]

Maybe it’s just an indication that time has passed? As Frued said ‘Sometimes a cigar is just a cigar.’

[quote]Let’s say that when you were a kid, your dad died while saving you from a burning building. Later, you tell someone about it, only to have them say, “Wow, just like how Favre saved the Vikings.” You’re probably going to be offended at how the person has trivialized what your dad did, right?[/quote]

Especially since what your dad did actually happend.

I local reporter in New Orleans just \”tweeted\” that Drew Brees would be joining in on the pink cleats game this week for practice and game day.

[quote comment=”351203″]
And of course, halftime entertainment:
Oneida Nation Performance -Breast Cancer Awareness theme

How in the world can you have a halftime show with Breast Cancer Awareness theme? Oh well, let the pink madness begin. Even at Lambeau… *sigh* Not that I don’t like it, or am against it. Just as long as it isn’t overdone.

[/quote]
There was some chatter here yesterday about the Pittsburgh “Terrible Towel” going pink for the day, and I guess I’m going to piggyback my thoughts on your “one game per year” idea.

I get to go to maybe 3 Bears games every four years or so; not a game per year but close. So it’s a lot of fun, and a lot of planning and preparing goes into those trips. Now if I was a Pittsburgh fan, sitting on my couch 15 weekends per year with my Rothlsberger jersey and my towel, and I went to my one game of the year-well, a lot of the fun would be the shared experience of waving that very same Terrible Towel I use every other weekend and seeing that it’s part of the huge crowd at new Three Rivers. If I was one of the 50% who didn’t have a pink towel that day-it just wouldn’t be the same.

In short: if you’ve created this icon, don’t mess with it for one weekend (or two or three; I’m a firm beliver in slippery slope for this type of thing). Have a ribbon or pin or something that isn’t done every weekend. Come up with something new.

JohnnyO: hope you’ll let us know what that halftime show looks like.

Or maybe this will work

link

In honor of today’s photo on the front page…

link (Sorry, I don’t have the song, but will you settle for the lyrics?)

[quote comment=”351218″]

The Rangers should be the only NHL team to have it because the link that wore link looked stupid. Copycats need not apply in the NHL. Wasn’t that the complaint about the EDGE design: everyone looks the same?[/quote]

Sorry, but I like those diagonal road Penguins better than that hummingbird-gradient shit, tho I could do without the blockshadow.

[quote comment=”351231″][quote comment=”351218″]

The Rangers should be the only NHL team to have it because the link that wore link looked stupid. Copycats need not apply in the NHL. Wasn’t that the complaint about the EDGE design: everyone looks the same?[/quote]

Sorry, but I like those diagonal road Penguins better than that hummingbird-gradient shit, tho I could do without the blockshadow.[/quote]

Which is why they went back to the skating penguins. Moot point, ’nuff said.

[quote comment=”351029″]Would have been fun to see this Raider uni for the 50th celebration.
link

Basically the Bears uni in Steeler colors.

All the Raiders had FNOB in ’60, which that has to be cuz was only year Parilli was in Oakland. Was raded to Boston in the off season. In ’60 he shared the Raider QB job with an unknown from Pacific, some kid named Tom Flores.

“Traded”? When was the last NFL trade that involved active players actually switching teams? Moss to Oakland, maybe?

—Ricko[/quote]

Even better … When was the last time one active player was traded for another? I can’t remember.

Maybe in 1990 when the Saints traded their first round “bust” DT Shawn Knight for the Broncos similar undersized first round NT Gregory (can’t recall his first name, from Syracuse).

I’m sure there have been more recent examples, but very rare the player-for-player ytrade these days.

Speaking of the Old Days, you gotta love the team sportcoats from the 1960s that the owners and coaches wore – Check out Lamar Hunt and Bud Adams on the AFL pictures link above.

[quote comment=”351230″][quote comment=”351227″]Or maybe this will work

link

Apparently Nike is more important that the cause. Because it’s entirely appropriate to leave the white part of the shoe blank while putting your logo OVER THE IMPORTANT PART.[/quote]

would you like this better, teebz?

[quote comment=”351067″][quote comment=”351057″]Is it just me or do the Oilers original helmets and unis from the ’60s look like they used a much darker blue than what the Oilers are using this season in their AFL throwbacks? The AFL throwbacks look more like the baby blue of the 70s – 90s Oilers, to me.[/quote]

Oilers used same baby blue entire time they bore that name, from 1960 through the move to Tennessee. In fact, pretty sure it’s still the same blue used after change to Titans. It’s just lighting conditions, different technology, fabrics and materials…an optic thing.

—Ricko[/quote]

I got to say, the sghhade of Baby Blue used by the Oilers in the post-Silver Helmet era, when the went back to the Blue Helmet (1971-1974), looked like a bit darker, Ice/Baby Blue to me.

Maybe the photos or the weather made it look that way, but in N.O. we saw the oilers relatively often, and the Baby Blue of the Bum Phillips era sure looked a bit lighter than the 1971-1974 to me to me.

[quote comment=”351239″][quote comment=”351067″][quote comment=”351057″]Is it just me or do the Oilers original helmets and unis from the ’60s look like they used a much darker blue than what the Oilers are using this season in their AFL throwbacks? The AFL throwbacks look more like the baby blue of the 70s – 90s Oilers, to me.[/quote]

Oilers used same baby blue entire time they bore that name, from 1960 through the move to Tennessee. In fact, pretty sure it’s still the same blue used after change to Titans. It’s just lighting conditions, different technology, fabrics and materials…an optic thing.

—Ricko[/quote]

I got to say, the sghhade of Baby Blue used by the Oilers in the post-Silver Helmet era, when the went back to the Blue Helmet (1971-1974), looked like a bit darker, Ice/Baby Blue to me.

Maybe the photos or the weather made it look that way, but in N.O. we saw the oilers relatively often, and the Baby Blue of the Bum Phillips era sure looked a bit lighter than the 1971-1974 to me to me.[/quote]

Does look like that, but powder helmet indoors at Astrodome probably would look a bit darker than it would outdoors. Although helmets back then always were a bit darker than the jersey of the same color. Doubt they ever changed their PMS.

—Ricko

[quote comment=”351240″]Here is a list of what every team is doing for Breast Cancer Awareness Month (The list also includes Target selling “Madden ’10 Pink Version” where proceeds go to the Deanna Favre HOPE Foundation):
link

*sigh* That article was from LAST year. My bad

Here was the cover of Madden ’09 Pink Edition:
link

[quote comment=”351243″][quote comment=”351240″]Here is a list of what every team is doing for Breast Cancer Awareness Month (The list also includes Target selling “Madden ’10 Pink Version” where proceeds go to the Deanna Favre HOPE Foundation):
link

*sigh* That article was from LAST year. My bad

Here was the cover of Madden ’09 Pink Edition:
link

Huh, wierd, cuz I was at the Cardinals October 12 game, and I didn’t get no ribbon. Course I was pretty far gone by the time we went in, but i don’t remember hearing or seeing any pink ribbons. I suppose I could check my pictures.

[quote comment=”351183″][quote comment=”351176″][quote comment=”351161″]This whole offensive t-shirt controversy has basically been settled the same way as how the NFL justifies moving a Jets game earlier in the day to avoid a Jewish holiday while the league will schedule games on Christmas Eve or Christmas Day without a second thought.[/quote]

Actually, they do have a little consideration. There’s never been a night game on Christmas Eve, as far as I can recall.[/quote]

I believe Vikings had a 3 p.m. CT start on Christmas Eve in the past few years. Think was against Packers. That’s about as close as they’ve come.

—Ricko[/quote]

SAINTS had a similar 2:00pm or 2:30pm start vs the Cowboys on Christmas Eve in I believe 1999.

My girlfriend plays roller derby for the burning river roller girls here in Cleveland. She is a Rolling Pin Up. That GOtham team is really good they are always feature in their publications.
link
link

check em out
my girlfriend is punk’d pixie
enjoy
-Stoops

Two things that really, really, REALLY excited me from the NHL update: The Flames’ sock fiasco is over. I am so thankful for that. Also, it looks like every team is migrating back to the standard “sweater” type uniform rather than those craptastic things that were wannabe body suits. Man I hated that look.

I have always known UTEP’s stripe was the pick-axe thing. Not sure how or where from – but they do have a rather grandiose display as they take the field with the mascot weilding the pick-axe into the grass. I am quite sure the Reliant Stadium grounds crew was rather displeased with the hole in the endzone!

[quote comment=”351067″][quote comment=”351057″]Is it just me or do the Oilers original helmets and unis from the ’60s look like they used a much darker blue than what the Oilers are using this season in their AFL throwbacks? The AFL throwbacks look more like the baby blue of the 70s – 90s Oilers, to me.[/quote]

Oilers used same baby blue entire time they bore that name, from 1960 through the move to Tennessee. In fact, pretty sure it’s still the same blue used after change to Titans. It’s just lighting conditions, different technology, fabrics and materials…an optic thing.

—Ricko[/quote]

I too have wondered if the colors used were the same shade or tone as the originals. It seems like the Chargers old blue can look totally different than the ones used now. I agree it is most likely the lighting and other factors in old film or pictures.

I had been working on more screen grabs and sometimes I edit the grabs with more lighting if the film seems too dark.

Here is the Oilers bench shot with more lighting.

link

Not sure if anyone has caught this yet, but the Seahawks had different pants then there normal blues matched up with the lime green jersey, the pants matched the sleeves and the stripe down the side was different also.

[quote comment=”351257″]About using pink in any uniforms. I would like ti see it used. I know several colleges had pink as part of the uniforms at first. Well at least a couple. I know Penn State was pink and black. Syracuse I think had pink.

Now I think black and dark pink would look sharp. I am not a fan of Penn States uniforms. Imagine the Lions in black jerseys with pink numbers and pink pants. Pink helmet with single black stripe.

Uh maybe the away would not look as good. Pink pants pink jersey with black numbers[/quote]

i donno

think papa joe would go for it?

[quote comment=”351255″][quote comment=”351179″]Why should the Rangers should have an exclusive on the diagonal insignia?

Should the Yankees have an exclusive on pinstripes?[/quote]

First question… they shouldn’t. Avs used a similar jersey before – they are just goign back to pick up that cool retro look. Can’t scold anyone for an attempt at retro!

Second question… yes! Who the hell wants to look like a Yankee??? I still hate the Atros’ pins tripes after that Clemens debacle![/quote]

Regarding Yankee pinstripes, I don’t think other teams should be copying the same Yankee color style of pinstripes. However, I would strongly disagree with the idea all other MLB clubs be somehow disallowed from using pinstripes of their respective team colors. I liked the Phillies in red pinstripes and Pirates in gold pinstripes, and the Cubs look good currently, in their blue pinstripes.
In some respects , this argument reminds me of the Boston Bruins ill-advised decision to file a protest to the NHL in 1980 when the Pens decided to switch to black and yellow uniforms. It just doesn’t make any sense.

[quote comment=”351218″]
The Rangers should be the only NHL team to have it because the link that wore link looked stupid. Copycats need not apply in the NHL. Wasn’t that the complaint about the EDGE design: everyone looks the same?[/quote]

I just couldn’t disagree more with this.

[quote comment=”351007″]Any of you geeks see this?

link

He makes a REAL good point![/quote]

repeat after me.
THIS:
link
is THE BEST NFL UNI EVER. Nothing else comes close. IMO.

[quote comment=”351250″]My girlfriend plays roller derby for the burning river roller girls here in Cleveland. She is a Rolling Pin Up. That GOtham team is really good they are always feature in their publications.
link
link

check em out
my girlfriend is punk’d pixie
enjoy
-Stoops[/quote]

One of the teams is the Cleveland Steamers? Priceless!

[quote comment=”351268″]One of the teams is the Cleveland Steamers? Priceless![/quote]

I’m not sure which team “Gonnolea” plays for, but I wouldn’t want to catch her.

[quote comment=”351265″][quote comment=”351264″][quote comment=”351218″]
The Rangers should be the only NHL team to have it because the link that wore link looked stupid. Copycats need not apply in the NHL. Wasn’t that the complaint about the EDGE design: everyone looks the same?[/quote]

I just couldn’t disagree more with this.[/quote]

Absolutely, what is iconic about the New York Rangers diagonal name on their uniforms? We’re talking about a franchise which has won only four Stanley Cups in their history. That’s a remarkably low total, considering the Rangers had the huge advantage of entering the NHL an Original Six club. In that era, teams with losing records actually won Cups, something which would never happen today. By comparison, the Penguins entered the NHL several decades later, and have already won three Cups.[/quote]
You have to win a heap of championships for your look to be considered “iconic?” That’s asinine.

How many Lombardi trophies have the Chargers hoisted? I’d say the lightning bolts are a signature look. Conversely, when the Broncos did their most recent makeover, should the Bears have said to them, “Uh, we wear navy and orange and we’ve got 9 championships. Come up with another color scheme.”

What’s happening in this picture?

link

[quote comment=”351272″][quote comment=”351265″][quote comment=”351264″][quote comment=”351218″]
The Rangers should be the only NHL team to have it because the link that wore link looked stupid. Copycats need not apply in the NHL. Wasn’t that the complaint about the EDGE design: everyone looks the same?[/quote]

I just couldn’t disagree more with this.[/quote]

Absolutely, what is iconic about the New York Rangers diagonal name on their uniforms? We’re talking about a franchise which has won only four Stanley Cups in their history. That’s a remarkably low total, considering the Rangers had the huge advantage of entering the NHL an Original Six club. In that era, teams with losing records actually won Cups, something which would never happen today. By comparison, the Penguins entered the NHL several decades later, and have already won three Cups.[/quote]
You have to win a heap of championships for your look to be considered “iconic?” That’s asinine.

How many Lombardi trophies have the Chargers hoisted? I’d say the lightning bolts are a signature look. Conversely, when the Broncos did their most recent makeover, should the Bears have said to them, “Uh, we wear navy and orange and we’ve got 9 championships. Come up with another color scheme.”[/quote]

It’s not just championships, it’s also great players who have spent the vast majority with a franchise. On both counts, the Rangers fall short, especially when you consider how long they’ve been in existence. You mentioned the Chargers, and they’ve had many more great players who spent most of their career wearing that iconic jersey. That’s the important difference.

[quote comment=”351275″]The Penguins wore the arched “PITTSBURGH” lettering their first year in the NHL (though they ditched it the next). I know I’ve seen replicas at Mitchell & Ness and Ebbets Field of other minor and semi-pro teams who’ve sported the diagonal name. True, some a’ those looks might be made up to look old-timey and not historically accurate, but I still think of it more as a hockey thing than a Rangers thing.[/quote]

Here’s the thing.

The Penguins wore a diagonal “Pittsburgh” for a total of four seasons out of 42 possible seasons they have been in the NHL.

The Avalanche wore a diagonal “Colorado” for a total of six seasons out of 14 possible seasons they have been in the NHL.

The Brooklyn Americans wore a diagonal “Brooklyn” for a total of one season out of 17 season that they were in the NHL.

The Rangers have worn a diagonal “Rangers” or “New York” for 80 of the 83 seasons they have been a part of the NHL.

The diagonal name is clearly a New York Rangers design element. The red-white-and-blue has been copied by a number of teams, but the diagonal name has been associated with the Rangers as long as Native American head has been associated with the Blackhawks.

Other teams need to be original, not copycats. Otherwise, the NHL is the new NCAA.

[quote comment=”351278″]
Other teams need to be original, not copycats. Otherwise, the NHL is the new NCAA.[/quote]
Isn’t the object to sell jerseys?

Somewhere, “imitation is the sincerest form of flattery” has to come into the equation. If the jersey sells, great. But if the reaction from fans is “what? why would we want to look like the Rangers?” then they’ll try another look.

[quote comment=”351280″][quote comment=”351278″]
Other teams need to be original, not copycats. Otherwise, the NHL is the new NCAA.[/quote]
Isn’t the object to sell jerseys?

Somewhere, “imitation is the sincerest form of flattery” has to come into the equation. If the jersey sells, great. But if the reaction from fans is “what? why would we want to look like the Rangers?” then they’ll try another look.[/quote]

And as you can plainly see, neither Colorado nor Pittsburgh are wearing the diagonal names any longer. Need that be proof that the Rangers’ look only works for the Rangers?

Speaking of offensive shirts, what’s the deal with the Jewboys shirt on No Mas? I can’t believe you would approve that one and get mad at a shirt that calls the Giants Ginas! Oh wait, you are a NY fan, makes sense. Got to love your loyalty Paul.

[quote comment=”351259″]The UTEP helmet stripe ticker item made me think about the recent NFL uniform updates by Phil. He strongly dislikes the truncated pointy pant stripes, but I think they could be a signature look for the Panthers. I love his idea of making full sleeve stripes and tapering them to a point under the arm (this is already present on some Panther jerseys) You combine tapered shoulder stripes and tapered pant stripes, and all you need is a good helemt stripe to tie it all together.

Tapered pant stripe – link

Tapered shoulder stripe (already on some Panthers) – link

This brings me to the helmet stripe. I really dislike how the two black stripes outlined in blue flail away from one another – link
Why not straighten them out straight back, or replace them with a single tapered stripe that mimics the current pant stripe-
link
link

While I love the classic striping used by the Packers, I don’t think every team has to use them. Why not a modern striping pattern that still provides continuity between the helmet, jersey, and pant?[/quote]

watching the Cowboys – Carolina game Monday night I noticed some players on the Carolina D have a slightly different look with the stripes. some seem to be closer together than “regular.”

[quote comment=”351287″]
Mark Messier is one of many Rangers who didn’t spend the majority of his career as a Ranger. I agree, the Rangers have had some talented players, but the fact remains they rank 4th among the Original Six teams in success. Only winning four Cups since 1926 is not something to brag about. The tradition just is disappointing, especially when you consider that franchise had a 35 year head start before the first wave of NHL expansion. I follow hockey too, and I’ve never, ever, heard anyone say the Rangers look is iconic at all. The lack of success is most definitely a factor. Still can’t see anything wrong with other teams using diagonal lettering, I can’t recall any media person outside New York complaining.[/quote]

Mark Messier’s legend was made in New York City. He was a winner with Edmonton, but he became “Mess” with the Rangers.

It’s the Rangers’ look. They have worn it for so long that it’s impossible not to associate any other team with diagonal lettering with it.

It’s the same as the Fisherman jersey that the Islanders wore. Anyone else who were to use that would automatically be associated to the Fisherman. Why? Because it’s their look.

That’s what makes it iconic.

[quote comment=”351288″][quote comment=”351287″]
Mark Messier is one of many Rangers who didn’t spend the majority of his career as a Ranger. I agree, the Rangers have had some talented players, but the fact remains they rank 4th among the Original Six teams in success. Only winning four Cups since 1926 is not something to brag about. The tradition just is disappointing, especially when you consider that franchise had a 35 year head start before the first wave of NHL expansion. I follow hockey too, and I’ve never, ever, heard anyone say the Rangers look is iconic at all. The lack of success is most definitely a factor. Still can’t see anything wrong with other teams using diagonal lettering, I can’t recall any media person outside New York complaining.[/quote]

Mark Messier’s legend was made in New York City. He was a winner with Edmonton, but he became “Mess” with the Rangers.

It’s the Rangers’ look. They have worn it for so long that it’s impossible not to associate any other team with diagonal lettering with it.

It’s the same as the Fisherman jersey that the Islanders wore. Anyone else who were to use that would automatically be associated to the Fisherman. Why? Because it’s their look.

That’s what makes it iconic.[/quote]

It’s a good uniform, but answer me this: Why did the Rangers abandon their regular uniform for two years in the 1970s for the Winnipeg Jets look if their look was iconic? They discarded the diagonal lettering for the shield logo instead. Can’t imagine the Wings, Habs, or Leafs doing the same. Heck, even the Florida Panthers have stuck with their logo.
You mentioned the Islanders, I think it’s revealing they have won just as many Cups as the Rangers, despite entering the NHL nearly five decades later.

Letterman has the NY Rangers doing the top 10 list.
Dave said how great the classic Rangers uni is.

[quote comment=”351274″]What’s happening in this picture?

link

Tigers clinching the division over the Twins, natch

Gusto,

I know you already took your ball and went home, but aren’t you the same guy who was calling the Pirates a “storied franchise” and citing their 5 World Series championships as evidence?

5 championships in the World Series era is an average of once every 21 years or so. 4 Stanley Cups in the Rangers’ 83 seasons is…?

The Houston Aeros wore diagonal lettering for their entire existence, and won two WHA championships.

And how do we even know the Rangers were the first team to wear diagonal lettering? Maybe they ripped it off of some Canadian or college team. If they weren’t the first, then they no more have an exclusive on it than the Detroit Tigers do on Old English monograms. Nor do the NFL Rams have a monopoly on curving rams’ horns (copied by a couple of college teams).

[quote comment=”351300″]The Houston Aeros wore diagonal lettering for their entire existence, and won two WHA championships.

And how do we even know the Rangers were the first team to wear diagonal lettering? Maybe they ripped it off of some Canadian or college team. If they weren’t the first, then they no more have an exclusive on it than the Detroit Tigers do on Old English monograms. Nor do the NFL Rams have a monopoly on curving rams’ horns (copied by a couple of college teams).[/quote]

Find me a team that has (a) worn it for more than 83 years, and (b) worn it before 1926, and you got yourself a deal.

Dear Uniwatch Nation:

As owner of Sportscrack.com I would like to stand up for myself on these shirts we are talking about. The shirts are meant to be funny. Yes, they can be seen offensive to some people and for this I apologize. We went out of our way to accommodate to Paul’s wishes to make a separate store page without some of the shirts on there he found offensive. Unfortunately that didn’t work out either. In no way do any of our shirts say “Kill The Homos” like Paul was referring to. They are meant to be a play of words that fans use on their arch rival. For instance our Ann Arbor is a Whore shirt and FUSC shirt. Those should be considered offensive by some people but I guess that is the point: we aren’t targeting gay people specifically. Trust me there are a lot more offensive t shirts out there then Gaytors or Oklahomo.

In 4 years of business we had one complaint and that was from a Uniwatch reader. He went to Paul and complained and said we were being homophobic and hateful. I told him the shirts are meant to be in good humor. We do not condone violence against anybody. But in the end the PC police won out.

I thank Paul for letting us advertise on this wonderful blog and wish him the best of luck. Hopefully sometime in the future we can work together.

Sincerely,

Matt Fairchild
Sportscrack.com
Drinklikeachampiontoday.com