Smell the Glove (if that’ll help you solve the mystery)

Paul – Enjoy Louisiana! If you want to know some good places to eat, let me know!

My guess on the glove is #76 Sebastian Vollmer. Look at link.

Now we know why Galloway was such a nothing for the Pats — his receiver gloves were 7 sizes too big!

I am going to guess that the glove belonged to tackle Nick Kaczur, # 77. I have a pic with him in it, showing that he is wearing that type of glove. I’ll send it via email. He is also a really big guy, weighing in around 315…..

Interesting item here…take a look at the website for the video game link and notice the customized uniforms on each of the NFL players in pictures that are cycled through in the background (for side by side comparison, I’ve put them all together link). According to the bottom of the page they don’t have any affiliation with the NFL, which explains the fake unis, but they also don’t have any association with the NFLPA, so how can they get away with this? Individual deals with each player?

Love the Cherokee-language helmet logo. I wish that sort of thing were more common — for example, at international events like the World Baseball Classic. It’s not like English-speaking fans are going to wonder what team that is that’s wearing red hats with yellow Chinese lettering instead of the letter “C”.

Thanks for the link to the Chief Zee story. Still, the guy should feel lucky that the Skins haven’t link like they have other fans.

I used to be in favor of getting rid of the name “Redskins.” But recent events have changed my mind completely. Now I’m in favor of getting rid of the whole damn team.

“Here’s a Halloween costume idea worth stealing: You can go as the ghost of Ted Williams.”

My only complaint would be that Teddy Ballgame wouldn’t have worn batting gloves…I still love this one:

link

[quote comment=”355817″]Interesting item here…take a look at the website for the video game link and notice the customized uniforms on each of the NFL players in pictures that are cycled through in the background (for side by side comparison, I’ve put them all together link). According to the bottom of the page they don’t have any affiliation with the NFL, which explains the fake unis, but they also don’t have any association with the NFLPA, so how can they get away with this? Individual deals with each player?[/quote]

UGH, I don’t like seeing Brian Westbrook in a different uniform, but I suppose it’s only a matter of time… congrats to Brian Dawkins on making the right choice to leave the sinking ship.

But most importantly…

CONGRATULATIONS to the BACK TO BACK NATIONAL LEAGUE CHAMPION Philadelphia Phillies!

The only player I’ve seen in all the Patriots-Titans photos wearing white gloves is Myron Pryor.

link

He also has worn those model gloves before.
link

He is 6’1″ and 310 pounds, so he could have gloves that big.

It’s a shame Oregon is not wearing green helmets with those jerseys/pants. I think that look might rival the legendary week 3 uniforms.

Those Expos unis rank right at the top of my all-time favorites. Classic look of what a uniform should be.

link

looks like you can buy the elmer fudd hats. saw this after the phillies won last night link

link

Possible glove owners

[quote comment=”355836″][quote comment=”355834″][quote comment=”355832″]Great pic of Joe Pa and his hightops.

link.jpg[/quote]

try again

link.jpg[/quote]

this should do it, sorry….

link

Third time is a charm

From the Redskins Article:

“The U.S. Supreme Court is considering whether to hear a lawsuit arguing that the “Redskins” trademark violates standards of decency. And the U.S. Senate passed a resolution this month recognizing “years of official depredations, ill-conceived policies, and the breaking of covenants by the federal government regarding Indian tribes.” An apology was made for “the many instances of violence, maltreatment and neglect inflicted on native peoples.”

As an attorney nay, American, the idea of the Supreme Court deciding what is and is not decent disgusts me even more than the ‘Redskins’ moniker itself.

the review for “Shark Sandwich” was merely a two word review which simply read “Shit Sandwich”

Where’d they print that? You can’t write that!

Oh, and I’m pretty sure the glove belonged to Joe “Mama” Besser.

Hmm… Not sure what happened with that link there but it’s supposed to be link.

[quote comment=”355818″][quote]Oregon will reportedly be going with link on Saturday.[/quote]

lets exclude the “o” on the helmet and possible neon yellow on the cleats…is this the first time (although i’m sure it’s not) the u of zero is going with a uniform (jersey/pants) that doesn’t even include one official school color?

i guess the kids like it[/quote]

Only thing I like about this look, is the fact that it’s a matte black. Aside from that, this is my least favorite combination to date. Good thing they’re playing good football, detracts from some of the more undesirable uniform combinations. Week 3 attire still my favorite look thus far.

And based on photomatching, it’s definitely NOT link.

Damn, free membership would’ve been nice, too.

[quote comment=”355841″]From the Redskins Article:

“The U.S. Supreme Court is considering whether to hear a lawsuit arguing that the “Redskins” trademark violates standards of decency. And the U.S. Senate passed a resolution this month recognizing “years of official depredations, ill-conceived policies, and the breaking of covenants by the federal government regarding Indian tribes.” An apology was made for “the many instances of violence, maltreatment and neglect inflicted on native peoples.”

As an attorney nay, American, the idea of the Supreme Court deciding what is and is not decent disgusts me even more than the ‘Redskins’ moniker itself.[/quote]

I second the thought.

[quote comment=”355826″]Love the headline. “Smell The Glove” is a great album, right up there with “Intravenous De Milo”.[/quote]
This tasteless cover is a good indication of the lack of musical invention within. The musical growth rate of the band cannot even be charted. They are treading water in a sea of retarded sexuality and bad poetry.

As much as I like the 80’s Expos uniforms with the side stripes, link is the absolute greatest uniform they ever had. In fact, it’s one of the greatest uniforms ANY baseball team ever had!

[quote comment=”355855″][quote comment=”355841″]As an attorney nay, American, the idea of the Supreme Court deciding what is and is not decent disgusts me even more than the ‘Redskins’ moniker itself.[/quote]

As an attorney, I’d have expected that you would understand that the Supreme Court is not, in fact, deciding what is and is not decent. Rather, the Supreme Court is deciding whether a particular group of plaintiffs have standing to challenge the trademark status of the Redskins name. Not decency, but standing is at issue here.

Now, if the Supreme Court upholds the plaintiffs’ right to sue — which the Supreme Court almost certainly will not, since denying standing is the chief instrument by which the activist conservative majority on the Supreme Court has been radically rewriting American law for the last twelve years — then decency will come into play in an appeals court hearing, and the Redskins will be toast. This is because trademark law prohibits the government from giving trademark protection to offensive or indecent marks, and has since the first trademark law was enacted in 1870.

Also, as an attorney, I would expect you to understand that there is no conceivable First Amendment or free speech dimension to the Redskins case. The Redskins’ right to call themselves the Redskins is not at issue. Even if the Skins lose their standing argument in the Supreme Court, and then lose the subsequent trademark appeal, the Redskins will still have the absolute free-speech right to call themselves the Redskins. All the team will lose is a government-issued license to use the courts to enforce a monopoly on the commercial use of the name and logo.

Crying “free speech!” over the Redskins trademark case is exactly analogous to crying “free press!” because the government doesn’t let Paul host this blog on government servers for free. The lack of government assistance to help you speak is not a restriction on your freedom of speech.[/quote]

Not starting a political comment, just making a correction: the Supreme Court is not a conservative majority, althought the chief justice is a conservative.

Now back to the unis.

[quote comment=”355854″][quote comment=”355826″]Love the headline. “Smell The Glove” is a great album, right up there with “Intravenous De Milo”.[/quote]
This tasteless cover is a good indication of the lack of musical invention within. The musical growth rate of the band cannot even be charted. They are treading water in a sea of retarded sexuality and bad poetry.[/quote]

It’s such a fine line between stupid, and clever.

[quote comment=”355825″][quote comment=”355822″][quote comment=”355809″]Paul – Enjoy Louisiana! If you want to know some good places to eat, let me know![/quote]

He’d better have breakast at Mother’s.[/quote]

I have, several times (debris!). But I’m not gonna be in New Orleans. Gonna be in Baton Rouge.[/quote]

Paul – Hit Raising Canes for some great chicken strips, the Chimes, The Bulldog, Superior Grill, TJ Ribs, or Boutin’s Cajun Restaurant.

Another sign the apocalypse is near…and there’s an app for that.

link

here are some vertically striped socks in a bizarre pic link

Speaking of the Dolphins’ aqua tops, someone here the other day put forth the claim that Miami’s aqua was originally more green that it is today.. and then a Sports Illustrated cover from 1966 was produced on which a debut-season Dolphin is wearing a jersey that looks virtually sky blue – seemingly disproving the “more green” theory, but which could be just a weird anomaly (it doesn’t even look aqua at all).

I’ve wondered about this before: have the Dolphins ever recalibrated their aqua.. has the shade evolved over the years? I just can’t seem to find evidence to prove anything. Looking at the Topps cards from ’67, the aqua shade appears exactly the same as it is today – same blue/green balance. Is it just a case of different lighting situations throwing a different cast on the color, thus misleading us into suspecting a color shift?

[quote comment=”355869″][quote comment=”355865″][quote comment=”355861″][quote]Not starting a political comment, just making a correction: the Supreme Court is not a conservative majority, althought the chief justice is a conservative.[/quote]

um…lets see

John Roberts (Chief Justice) – nominated by Bush the second – conservative

John Paul Stevens – nom. by Ford – considered liberal

Antonin Scalia – nom. by Reagan – conservative

Anthony Kennedy – Reagan – conservative

Clarence Thomas – Bush I – conservative

Ruth Bader Ginsberg – Clinton – liberal

Stephen Breyer – Clinton – liberal

Samuel Alito – Bush II – conservative

Sonia Sotomayor – Obama – (too early to tell, but considered extremely liberal)

….

hmmm — now, of course, not every ruling will have every justice voting the way i just described them above, but those are most certainly their leanings…and by my count, that’s at least 5-4 “conservative”

not sure how that’s not considered a majority

jim — you wanna set me straight…or do i have that about right?[/quote]
It’s more like 4-4-1, with Kennedy as the tie.[/quote]

That’s more like it, Chris and Phil. Now back to unis?[/quote]
Sure, but one more thing…

As Phil said, “now, of course, not every ruling will have every justice voting the way i just described them above, but those are most certainly their leanings.”

Kennedy tends to cast a conservative vote more often than not.

[quote]It’s more like 4-4-1, with Kennedy as the tie.[/quote]

while not every ruling kennedy has made sides with the “conservative” view (perhaps he doesn’t always blindly vote), he has cast rulings that are more often than not, considered conservative leaning — (although he has ‘flip flopped’ on hot button topics like abortion, gay rights and gun control…he also cast the fifth and deciding vote in the gore/bush election of 2000 (which was actually a ruling on the “equal protection” clause — not a “vote” for president as has been widely assumed)

but i’ll allow that kennedy cannot always be considered a “conservative” justice, in the sense of “conservative versus liberal”

[quote comment=”355872″][quote]It’s more like 4-4-1, with Kennedy as the tie.[/quote]

while not every ruling kennedy has made sides with the “conservative” view (perhaps he doesn’t always blindly vote), he has cast rulings that are more often than not, considered conservative leaning — (although he has ‘flip flopped’ on hot button topics like abortion, gay rights and gun control…he also cast the fifth and deciding vote in the gore/bush election of 2000 (which was actually a ruling on the “equal protection” clause — not a “vote” for president as has been widely assumed)

but i’ll allow that kennedy cannot always be considered a “conservative” justice, in the sense of “conservative versus liberal”[/quote]
That seems like as good a place as any to put a bow on this debate.

[quote]Should be noted that Kennedy voted to uphold Row v. Wade and authored the opinions invalidating laws against homosexual sodomy and laws taking away homosexual rights. If nothing else, would seem to prevent him from being considered “conservative”.[/quote]

you say that like it’s a bad thing

[quote comment=”355875″][quote comment=”355871″]Should be noted that Kennedy voted to uphold Row v. Wade and authored the opinions invalidating laws against homosexual sodomy and laws taking away homosexual rights. If nothing else, would seem to prevent him from being considered “conservative”.[/quote]
Right. Because stances on abortion and gay rights are the only two things to consider in determining “liberal” vs. “conservative” anymore.[/quote]

No, I was simply stating that Kennedy’s opposition on two issues generally considered to be conservative makes it difficult to simply pigeon-hole him as a conservative or a liberal.

[quote]Are you referring to his votes on those issues or being a conservative?[/quote]

yes

[quote comment=”355864″]Another sign the apocalypse is near…and there’s an app for that.

link

Ugh…the two horses of the apocolypse…Nike and Apple…

[quote comment=”355882″][quote comment=”355864″]Another sign the apocalypse is near…and there’s an app for that.

link

Ugh…the two horses of the apocolypse…Nike and Apple…[/quote]

I’ll give you Nike, but Apple??

[quote comment=”355883″][quote comment=”355878″][quote comment=”355875″][quote comment=”355871″]Should be noted that Kennedy voted to uphold Row v. Wade and authored the opinions invalidating laws against homosexual sodomy and laws taking away homosexual rights. If nothing else, would seem to prevent him from being considered “conservative”.[/quote]
Right. Because stances on abortion and gay rights are the only two things to consider in determining “liberal” vs. “conservative” anymore.[/quote]

No, I was simply stating that Kennedy’s opposition on two issues generally considered to be conservative makes it difficult to simply pigeon-hole him as a conservative or a liberal.[/quote]
OK, fine. Refresh my memory. Where was it that I was trying to “pigeon-hole” him?

My point was this: while he is considered a “swing vote” his voting record is more on the conservative side of things than the liberal.

I was not saying that he’s a conservative and that’s the end of the discussion.[/quote]

Uh, OK. You win

hopefully I am not repeating. but check out the “sweaters” the Kingston Frontenacs trotted out for “Military Night”

link
link

[quote comment=”355825″]

I have, several times (debris!). But I’m not gonna be in New Orleans. Gonna be in Baton Rouge.[/quote]

Shame you’re not coming next weekend, you could catch the LSU hockey team in action.

I’ve been taking advantage of the free preview package of NHL games and, naturally, checking out the uniforms. I still haven’t come to grips with the Reebok Edge system, but I realize that there’s no going back to the traditional sweater design. The biggest problem I have is with the uniforms featuring stripes at the bottom of the jersey (almost half of the teams have this). Because the jerseys have curved shirttails, the portion of the jersey hanging below the stripes gives the jersey an uneven and asymmetrical appearance.

In fact, I checked out the NHL Uniform site link
and discovered this entry for the Rangers for the first year of the system (2007):

“The Rangers carry over their existing jersey design to the new Reebok Edge uniform system. In the latter half of its first season, Rangers management — always resistent to change — ordered the edges of the curved tails to be hemmed underneath the jersey to make it appear that the tail is straight.”

The Rangers no longer hem their jerseys and, alas, have conformed to the system. The problem, however, still remains –for them and for the dozen or so other teams that still employ the bottom stripes. It’s particularly tough to mess around with an iconic design, but these teams need to redesign their uniforms to eliminate this flaw. I don’t mean a complete overhaul, I just mean some sort of adjustment — perhaps by incorporating the stripes into the bottom trim.

I wonder if anybody else is bothered by this and, if so, what solutions they may have.

[quote comment=”355892″]I’ve been taking advantage of the free preview package of NHL games and, naturally, checking out the uniforms. I still haven’t come to grips with the Reebok Edge system, but I realize that there’s no going back to the traditional sweater design. The biggest problem I have is with the uniforms featuring stripes at the bottom of the jersey (almost half of the teams have this). Because the jerseys have curved shirttails, the portion of the jersey hanging below the stripes gives the jersey an uneven and asymmetrical appearance.

In fact, I checked out the NHL Uniform site link
and discovered this entry for the Rangers for the first year of the system (2007):

“The Rangers carry over their existing jersey design to the new Reebok Edge uniform system. In the latter half of its first season, Rangers management — always resistent to change — ordered the edges of the curved tails to be hemmed underneath the jersey to make it appear that the tail is straight.”

The Rangers no longer hem their jerseys and, alas, have conformed to the system. The problem, however, still remains –for them and for the dozen or so other teams that still employ the bottom stripes. It’s particularly tough to mess around with an iconic design, but these teams need to redesign their uniforms to eliminate this flaw. I don’t mean a complete overhaul, I just mean some sort of adjustment — perhaps by incorporating the stripes into the bottom trim.

I wonder if anybody else is bothered by this and, if so, what solutions they may have.[/quote]
There is going back, it’s telling Reebok that it, and its Rbk Edge system, can go fornicate itself with their “innovations”

[quote comment=”355872″][quote]It’s more like 4-4-1, with Kennedy as the tie.[/quote]

while not every ruling kennedy has made sides with the \”conservative\” view (perhaps he doesn’t always blindly vote), he has cast rulings that are more often than not, considered conservative leaning — (although he has ‘flip flopped’ on hot button topics like abortion, gay rights and gun control…he also cast the fifth and deciding vote in the gore/bush election of 2000 (which was actually a ruling on the “equal protection” clause — not a “vote” for president as has been widely assumed)

but i’ll allow that kennedy cannot always be considered a “conservative” justice, in the sense

As an attorney, I motion we return the postings to the topic of athletic aesthetics…

[quote comment=”355897″][quote comment=”355889″][quote comment=”355885″][quote comment=”355881″][quote comment=”355877″]Next thing you know, it’ll be noted that Kennedy voted for the Gordon Fisherman uni’s…[/quote]

I would. And I challenge anyone who doesn’t vote for the Fisherman jersey as unpatriotic and anti-American. LOL[/quote]
When Long Island secedes from New York, should that jersey be the basis for its state flag?[/quote]

Well, there is the 51st state movement, but it will never happen…Long Island would lose so much money from Albany and vice versa…taxes are insane as it stands right now for the island…it’s where most people spend their money instead of the Islanders…(note: I do/did like the Fisherman Uni…but as a Ranger fan, it makes for beating (POTVIN SUCKS!) a dead fish…

But if LI lowers taxes, maybe more than 9,100 people would have went to see them win a game finally (and Tavares scored the winning shoot out)[/quote]
If Long Island wants to secede, then they’ll have to get in line. Staten Island (from the city) and the City of New York (from the state) were both here first.[/quote]
But their flags won’t be as good.

If LI or NYC or if we somehow/someway come up with a 51st state, should we grant a merger twith Alberta, Canada to be the 52nd state just to keep the #of starts even??

Then all the flags on Uni’s would have to be changed too!!

*stars…

[quote comment=”355895″]The glove belongs to OJ Simpson.[/quote]

No, the glove doesn’t fit OJ. ;)

[quote comment=”355904″][quote comment=”355895″]The glove belongs to OJ Simpson.[/quote]

No, the glove doesn’t fit OJ. ;)[/quote]

So you must acquit!

[quote comment=”355907″] their best one was the LP that had “Lick my Love Pump” on it.[/quote]

lick my love pump was never released

it was the piece nigel played for marty debergi during one of his interviews…

part of an unreleased trilogy, a musical trilogy in d minor — which is the saddest of all keys

Anyone complain yet that today’s comments aren’t uni-related and ask for the comment section to be shut down because of it?

Starstruck is selling 12 versions of the “downflap” Elmer Fudd style MLB caps. 12 versions for 10 teams. Alas, no Nats version yet, but there are 2 choices for Red Sox nation. Nothing pink though….

link

[quote comment=”355913″]Starstruck is selling 12 versions of the “downflap” Elmer Fudd style MLB caps. 12 versions for 10 teams. Alas, no Nats version yet, but there are 2 choices for Red Sox nation. Nothing pink though….

link

Finally, my coke bottle glasses will have the perfect accompaniment. Thank you!

[quote comment=”355911″]Anyone complain yet that today’s comments aren’t uni-related and ask for the comment section to be shut down because of it?[/quote]
There have definitely been requests to shut down certain commentators.

[quote comment=”355917″]There have definitely been requests to shut down certain commentators.[/quote]I know, I put in one myself.

[quote comment=”355915″]
Finally, my coke bottle glasses will have the perfect accompaniment. Thank you![/quote]
The NFL knit caps have a pattern variety available. I wonder if we can talk MLB into making one with a plaid pattern here?

[quote comment=”355911″]Anyone complain yet that today’s comments aren’t uni-related and ask for the comment section to be shut down because of it?[/quote]

Like this one?

[quote comment=”355923″]Like this one?[/quote]
Exactly!

Leon is posting non uni-related comments! I don’t even want to look at another site; much less do something else! SHUT DOWN THE COMMENTS!!

;-)

[quote comment=”355922″]I’d guess that Tampa has hats because they wore them in the 2008 World Series.[/quote]
That would be the only reason-and more specifically their manager’s rather offbeat look while wearing them.

Still, I just don’t see them as selling well in the greater Tampa-St. Pete-Clearwater SMSA…

[quote comment=”355926″]
i meant yours[/quote]
i know. that’s why i added the ;-)

(I spent so much time getting the capitalization to match I screwed up the quote tags.)

The LA 49ers? That’s one of seven possibilities, according to this story:
link

[quote comment=”355930″]Because in Tampa they start scrambling for earlaps if it’s 55 degrees.
[/quote]A friend moved from Chicago to San Antonio, where they apparently have “bring your pet inside” warnings on the TV newscasts when it’s going below 40 degrees.

It’s a different mindset, for sure.

[quote comment=”355934″]because it’s smart to keep them outside all night when it’s under 40?[/quote]
Dunno.

But you don’t hear them making an announcement on the television news here until it’s below say, zero.

[quote comment=”355936″]One armed semi-blind lumber jack/Red Sox fan. Halloween costume, complete.[/quote]C’mon, that’s so cliche & trite. It’s been done to death already.

;-)

[quote comment=”355825″][quote comment=”355822″][quote comment=”355809″]Paul – Enjoy Louisiana! If you want to know some good places to eat, let me know![/quote]

He’d better have breakast at Mother’s.[/quote]

I have, several times (debris!). But I’m not gonna be in New Orleans. Gonna be in Baton Rouge.[/quote]

Mike Anderson’s Restaurant not to far from LSU campus/downtown is pretty good seafood at pretty reasonable prices. Some LSU memorabilia, but not enough to aggitate anyone not an LSU kool-aid drinker. Mike was an All-American LB in late 1960s, in recent Bob Hope AA photos posted on UW.

Try the “Joliet Rouge” or the “Howard”, a broiled fish topped with lump crabmeat and mushrooms in a butter sauce. Big portions, Big Taste, under $25.00. Ask if they have Puppydrum fish available – that type works well with that dish.

Comes with a House Salad – their House dressing is an addictive garlic/parmesean/green onion/olive oil mix that will keep you up at night thinking about it weeks later. They sell pints to bring home for $5.00.

Looks like a little problem at UCF!
link

Fellow guys who get it-

I’ve decided to make “sideline apparel” t-shirts for my fantasy football team and want to model them on the current adidas models that coaches wear. I’m wondering if any of you are font whizzes that could tell me what font they use. For reference, here’s a link with an example from my preferred football team :
link

Any help would be greatly appreciated. I’ve gone to the edge of the internet and back looking for a style guide, but just can’t find one.

looks like there’s a photoshopped photo of what the UO uniforms ought to look like this Saturday on link

[quote comment=”355931″]The LA 49ers? That’s one of seven possibilities, according to this story:
link

What’s even more amazing is that they view the Rams as a possibility. Don’t they have a stadium that’s only like 10 years old???

[quote comment=”355946″][quote comment=”355941″]Looks like a little problem at UCF!
link
“The university says it is working with adidas “in determining how this unique set of circumstances will work for both parties.”
IMHO, it should work like this:

-addidas doesn’t pay the school.
-The school lets the kids wear whatever shoes they like.

Elegant in it’s simplicity, isn’t it?[/quote]

He won’t wear adidas because Nike holds a special place in his family? So, what, he’s saying it’s based on religious reasons?

I really don’t get this (unless, of course, as Phil said yesterday they’re planning some kind of “test case”).

I suppose the next ludicrous thing out of his mouth will be, “I want to make it on my own, not as Michael Jordan’s son.”

If that ever does get said, then why isn’t he just wearing the adidas and concentrating on basketball?

—Ricko

[quote comment=”355855″][quote comment=”355841″]As an attorney nay, American, the idea of the Supreme Court deciding what is and is not decent disgusts me even more than the ‘Redskins’ moniker itself.[/quote]

As an attorney, I’d have expected that you would understand that the Supreme Court is not, in fact, deciding what is and is not decent. Rather, the Supreme Court is deciding whether a particular group of plaintiffs have standing to challenge the trademark status of the Redskins name. Not decency, but standing is at issue here.

Now, if the Supreme Court upholds the plaintiffs’ right to sue — which the Supreme Court almost certainly will not, since denying standing is the chief instrument by which the activist conservative majority on the Supreme Court has been radically rewriting American law for the last twelve years — then decency will come into play in an appeals court hearing, and the Redskins will be toast. This is because trademark law prohibits the government from giving trademark protection to offensive or indecent marks, and has since the first trademark law was enacted in 1870.

Also, as an attorney, I would expect you to understand that there is no conceivable First Amendment or free speech dimension to the Redskins case. The Redskins’ right to call themselves the Redskins is not at issue. Even if the Skins lose their standing argument in the Supreme Court, and then lose the subsequent trademark appeal, the Redskins will still have the absolute free-speech right to call themselves the Redskins. All the team will lose is a government-issued license to use the courts to enforce a monopoly on the commercial use of the name and logo.

Crying “free speech!” over the Redskins trademark case is exactly analogous to crying “free press!” because the government doesn’t let Paul host this blog on government servers for free. The lack of government assistance to help you speak is not a restriction on your freedom of speech.[/quote]

If the Plaintiffs are granted standing, the result could end up with a court determining whether a mark is deemed so indecent that it should not receive basic trademark protection. If that happens, it means a court has determined because a (relatively) small group of people feel offended that a mark that has been protected since 1933 should be cancelled. If you can’t see the implications to our freedom of expression that such a decision would have, I say you are delusional.

I’ll grant you that I probably shouldn’t have used the phrase “as an attorney” because while my intent was to suggest that I am in a position to see the impact of overbearing government regulation on an every day basis, it gave you an opening to make an ignorant and sarcastic response incinuating that because I’m an attory I must know everything there is to know about every area of the law.

Is it a good thing that when I saw Dominick Brown at the Fall League game last night the first thing I thought of was “I’ve gotta send this to uniwatch!”

[quote comment=”355953″]I’m no PC nazi, but “Redskins” is a classless name, period. Nobody would accept a team named the “Blackskins” with a Shaka Zulu logo, or “Yellow Skins” with some Oriental caricature. The only reason the Redskins get away with it is because the number of American Indians is so small that they can’t be the “squeaky wheel” getting the grease.

I have zero issue with teams like the Chiefs, Braves, etc…but Redskins is patently racist and no amount of rationalization can change that. It shouldn’t be a legal battle for Snyder to show some class and change the name.[/quote]

I’m sure you meant to say “Asian”.

“The only reason the Redskins get away with it is because the number of American Indians is so small that they can’t be the “squeaky wheel” getting the grease.”

If only they hadn’t wasted all that energy on acquiring casinos.

[quote comment=”355952″]If the Plaintiffs are granted standing, the result could end up with a court determining whether a mark is deemed so indecent that it should not receive basic trademark protection. If that happens, it means a court has determined because a (relatively) small group of people feel offended that a mark that has been protected since 1933 should be cancelled. If you can’t see the implications to our freedom of expression that such a decision would have, I say you are delusional.[/quote]
I won’t go constitutional, but the ramifications of this being set as precedent would be enormous. Everyone who was offended by something would suddenly be in court.

And ironically, the number of items for sale labeled “Redskins” would multiply. The sales would still be there; the proceeds wouldn’t go to the NFL, that’s all. So from the point of view of “we shouldn’t have to see that word on the street” this lawsuit is counterproductive at the best.

The last time I was on this subject the rejoinder was “people are stupid”. That was meant as quite an intelligent argument. So I’m done now.

[quote comment=”355949″]
I really don’t get this (unless, of course, as Phil said yesterday they’re planning some kind of “test case”).[/quote]
I just don’t know what sort of “test case” this would be, but it’s ridiculous for anyone who signs a D-1 LOI to say they are ignorant of shoe contracts and their restrictions, much less Micheal Jordan’s son.

How can you say you’re a good teammate when your first agenda item is “I don’t want to wear the shoes that everyone else is wearing, and which pay for a significant portion of everyone’s scholarship here”??

[quote comment=”355948″]Oh man, good point. Things are really clickin’ right now. Can’t wait to tell my wife what I accomplished today. *lol*[/quote]

This does bring up a point for the mods, a column based on the best uni-based Halloween costume.

(I wasn’t here last Halloween so if this is an oldie but a goodie… never mind.)

[quote comment=”355821″]”Here’s a Halloween costume idea worth stealing: You can go as the ghost of Ted Williams.”

My only complaint would be that Teddy Ballgame wouldn’t have worn batting gloves…I still love this one:

link

[quote comment=”355965″]Wow. That would send a pretty bad message to communities considering building stadiums for their teams. “Build us a brand new stadium and we still might disappear ten years later”.[/quote]Depending on what kind of lease they sign, yeah.

But franchises have held Los Angeles over the heads of their own cities for so long it isn’t funny. If/when a team does relocate their it will take an arrow out of their quiver. And the “new” dome in San Antoinio is probably no better from a luxury suite basis than St. Louis, so… once LA falls, the franchise merry-go-round should slow down IMHO.

[quote comment=”355881″][quote comment=”355877″]Next thing you know, it’ll be noted that Kennedy voted for the Gordon Fisherman uni’s…[/quote]

I would. And I challenge anyone who doesn’t vote for the Fisherman jersey as unpatriotic and anti-American. LOL[/quote]

link

[quote comment=”355971″][quote comment=”355881″][quote comment=”355877″]Next thing you know, it’ll be noted that Kennedy voted for the Gordon Fisherman uni’s…[/quote]

I would. And I challenge anyone who doesn’t vote for the Fisherman jersey as unpatriotic and anti-American. LOL[/quote]

link[/quote]

So if they voted against the fisherman that’d make them not only anti-American, but also…um, pro-fish?

—Ricko

[quote comment=”355960″]
I won’t go constitutional[/quote]

good…don’t

[quote] but the ramifications of this being set as precedent would be enormous. Everyone who was offended by something would suddenly be in court.[/quote]

do you really not find the term “redskin” offensive? are you fucking serious? if you understood the case however, it technically has nothing to do with the use of an offensive term — it has to do with trademark protection (although that is being challenged on the grounds that the particular trademark violates the standards of decency)

[quote]And ironically, the number of items for sale labeled “Redskins” would multiply. The sales would still be there; the proceeds wouldn’t go to the NFL, that’s all.[/quote]

and if the proceeds don’t go to dan snyder and the NFL, watch how quickly the team seeks a name change

[quote]So from the point of view of “we shouldn’t have to see that word on the street” this lawsuit is counterproductive at the best.[/quote]

counterproductive? while i’m not a fan of the terms “braves” or “indians” or “fighting sioux,” those terms are not repugnant nor derogatory in the way that “redskins” is…do you not see the difference? the fact that the NFL and dan snyder can no longer profit (via the trademark protection they currently enjoy) is not in any way, shape or form, counterproductive

[quote]The last time I was on this subject the rejoinder was “people are stupid”. That was meant as quite an intelligent argument. So I’m done now.[/quote]

good

unfortunately, this case is not about the racist and derogatory nature of the term “redskins,” but about whether the us supreme court will rule upon (or even hear) a lawsuit arguing that the “Redskins” trademark violates standards of decency…

so, it’s more about $$$ than what is actually the right thing to do…and the only way dan snyder will “do the right thing” is if there is money, or rather, a loss of it, involved

as other lawyers on this board have already opined, whether or not the supreme court decides in favor of the plaintiffs, it will have no bearing on whether dan snyder can continue using the term “redskins”…but it will decide if he no longer deserves the trademark protection he currently enjoys…if he loses that, look for him to suddenly grow a conscience, declare that it was “wrong” to “keep using” that name for so long, and hold a public naming contest to come up with a new name…if he wins, well then, the name is fine and everyone should just STFU

but it is often easier, and more profitable, to do what is easy than what is right

Paul: Nothing uni-related here, just wanted to offer my condolences on the loss of your friend.

I hope the funeral tomorrow offers you the solace of being in the presence of others who knew & cared about him. And even though you’ll be working, I hope the weekend brings moments of peace, reflection & joy.

Has North Carolina ever worn all navy blue before?

[quote comment=”355980″][quote comment=”355979″]Has North Carolina ever worn all navy blue before?[/quote]
Those are awful.[/quote]

butch davis introed the dark blue top last season, and im pretty sure that’s also when the navy blue pants made their first appearance as well…plus those stupid truncated things that appear to be half stripes

im not sure if this is the first time they’re appeared together
… but i hope it’s the last

this is how tonight’s game should look

So, if the Yankees make the World Series, will they be wearing two patches on their caps? I don’t recall what Yankee players had on their caps for the All-Star Game this year. Anyone?

Why the Redskins have not become the Pigskins by now is beyond me. It’s sport-appropriate, it keeps the Skins nickname, it works with the Hogs/Hogettes angle. Well, I can think of one reason, but I for one would promise never to call them the Balls.

Also, some sort of logo seems to have been peeled off of the centerfield wall in tonight’s ALCS game. Its outline is still visible . . . “Angels” was part of the decal. Anyone know what it was for and why it was removed?

[quote comment=”355981″][quote comment=”355980″][quote comment=”355979″]Has North Carolina ever worn all navy blue before?[/quote]
Those are awful.[/quote]

butch davis introed the link last season, and im pretty sure that’s also when the link made their first appearance as well…plus those stupid truncated things that appear to be half stripes

im not sure if this is the first time they’re appeared together
… but i hope it’s the last

link tonight’s game should look[/quote]
I will never understand why people feel the need to flock with classic looks. All you ever hear out of Carolina is “God’s a fan, that’s why he made the sky Carolina blue” and some clown gets a bright idea and you end up with this crapola.

Football especially. Football seems to be a game where the recruits respond to tradition and classic schools-hoops, much less.

[quote comment=”355975″]
do you really not find the term “redskin” offensive? are you fucking serious? [/quote]
Yeah.

AFAIK, the majority of the Native Americans don’t find it offensive. I invite you to ask them if they’re “fucking serious”. Or if they “do not see the difference”.

…the fact that for three out of four Native Americans, even a nickname such as Redskins, which many whites consider racist, isn’t objectionable.

The Phoenix Indian High School’s newspaper is The Redskin.

(Betty Ann Gross, a member of the Sisseton-Wahpeton Sioux tribe) wants Indian mascots and the tomahawk chop discarded, but she has no problem with team names like … the Redskins.

link

[quote]if you understood the case[/quote]
I do.

Do you?

[quote]and if the proceeds don’t go to dan snyder and the NFL, watch how quickly the team seeks a name change[/quote]
Be happy to.

I wonder what percentage of sales at NFL Properties the Redskins franchise currently represent, and what percentage of that comes from either their spear, or just the word “Washington”? And from that, how many people will just go cheap, vs how many will stick with what’s available at Redskins Park or their stadium pro shop. Won’t they still be able to demand royalties on “Redskins” using their distinctive typeface?

For that matter, I wonder why people who are buying Redskins paraphanelia today, right now aren’t as outraged as you?? Are they “fucking serious”??

[quote]good[/quote]
You really need to chill out. I really doubt the Supremes will even hear the case: so I doubt the current ruling will be overturned.

Like I said; arguing this here isn’t worth it.

[quote comment=”355977″]Paul: Nothing uni-related here, just wanted to offer my condolences on the loss of your friend.

I hope the funeral tomorrow offers you the solace of being in the presence of others who knew & cared about him. And even though you’ll be working, I hope the weekend brings moments of peace, reflection & joy.[/quote]

Very well put. Allow me to join in those sentiments.

[quote comment=”355947″][quote comment=”355931″]The LA 49ers? That’s one of seven possibilities, according to this story:
link

What’s even more amazing is that they view the Rams as a possibility. Don’t they have a stadium that’s only like 10 years old???[/quote]

LA 49ers. Right. Not a chance.

[quote comment=”355909″][quote comment=”355907″] their best one was the LP that had “Lick my Love Pump” on it.[/quote]

lick my love pump was never released

it was the piece nigel played for marty debergi during one of his interviews…

part of an unreleased trilogy, a musical trilogy in d minor — which is the saddest of all keys[/quote]
D minor? I’d vote for E minor. The B major chord – the dominant – is so intense . . .

[quote comment=”355997″]Watching the FSU UNC game I was thinking…wouldn’t it be nice to take that argyle like pattern on the UNC basketball uniforms and incorporate it into the football uniforms. Perhaps that pattern on Carolina blue socks?[/quote]

That could be something that would work. why not?

Let’s get away from the cookie cutter templates.

Speaking of tonight, the Navy jerseys would have looked alot better with light Blue or White pants. Navy over Navy just Blahhhhhed the whole effect. It did not look good, and it did not look special – it just looked Blahhhhh.

[quote comment=”355924″]hey teebz, remember when we were kids, and were in that ice show? i think you performed under the name congo, and i believe, if i recall correctly, i used the name patty. well i found some olde super 8 of it link[/quote]

Despite me laughing, Mr. Marshall, I hate you. KIDDING!!! LOL

Actually, this comment cracked me up. Totally needed a good laugh! Thanks! :o)

In regards to the center red line in hockey from yesterday’s main entry…I was just watching Red Wings-Coyotes and they showed a clip from the last game in Winnipeg. The center line had red airplanes (Jets) bordered by two thin red lines. SO tough to find a pic online of it though.

Pretty much uni-related: Martin St. Louis has to remove an item of equipment/clothing every time his breakaway is stopped. SFW.

link