And…The Winner Is…

Happy Birthday, Paul. I’ll be wearing my official Uni Watch stirrups in your honor today.

As a gift, here’s link, two Chicago High Schools, in yesterday’s Illinois Class 4A link.

Dunno if those are true tiled stripes link (Marcus “I ain’t wearin’ no stinkin’ three stripes at UCF” Jordan’s alma mater), but I like.

link was the winner.

For Clint Gaze,
Your “current and correct” camouflage pattern is “incorrect”. MARPAT runs horizontally, not vertically.

[quote comment=”382429″]Not that it matters much, but can ID three of the four Millers in the lead photo here.
link

l to r, Gene March, Vito Valentinetti and Lu Clinton. Totally going up on the guy to far right. Chuck Schilling, maybe?

—Ricko[/quote]

Gene MAUCH. Jeez.

Happy Birthday, Paul.

Hope the party goes well. Wish I could be there.

—Ricko

If you would have waited until April 1st to reveal the winner,than that Seahawks uni could be reality.

FormerDirtDart: Thanks for pointing that out. As I went on to state, I’m not the expert in military camouflage and didn’t realize that the direction of the swatch I downloaded was the incorrect orientation. I just know enough to know that the Padres current camo jersey is just ridiculous, and my concept is to hopefully point them in the right direction.

Happy Birthday Paul!

Congrats to Brad McPelican. Lookin’ forward to seeing the jersey from classic old school.

[quote comment=”382437″]The major sports all have a standard isssue ball (or puck) – the same should go for golf and racing equipment.[/quote]

so…baseball players should all use only one size (length) and weight bat?

every football player should wear the same helmet and shoulder pads?

every basketball player should wear the same sneaker?

every hockey player should use the same make and model stick?

is that what you’re saying? because in golf, they all have (due to very stingent specs) the same size and weight (for the most part) ball

Happy Birthday Paul. Thanks for this fantastic blog. I look forward to reading it everyday!

Happy Birthday Paul!

[quote comment=”382445″]No, I’m saying they all use the same ball or puck. I didn’t mention uniforms. Of course the clothing (including shoes) doesn’t have to be the same. And yes, the clubs, sticks, bats, etc. need to be sized properly.

With golf and racing, it just seems that more emphasis is placed on the equipment. I’m saying give everyone the same car and issue out the same (again, sized to fit) set of clubs. Then let’s see who’s the best.[/quote]

yeah…i edited my post to say they all (basically) use the same golf ball

i don’t much care for NASCAR/indy/formula 1, so i’ll stick to golf

but you cannot compare the EQUIPMENT used by golfers (and call for standardization) as a valid argument — if you want to make everyone play a titlist pro v1 and only that ball, then i’ll agree your argument has validity

but to say everyone should use the same clubs (which in and of itself isn’t a bad argument) by extension, means you want the equipment by all the other sports to be identical as well — like same bat, helmet, pads, sneakers & stick for the team sports

das all

[quote comment=”382449″]I can’t believe I’ve been reading all this time and never posted before.

Since the Stirrup Brain Trust hangs out here, I figured I’d ask this here.

I’m having difficulty figuring out what stirrup opening sizes mean on a real person (4″, 7″, etc.)

For a visual reference, what would the sizes be in these pictures?

A: link?

B: link?

C: link?

Thanks![/quote]

the size (4″, 5″, 9″, 15″ etc.) of course refer to the opening measured from the base (i believe to the “higher” point — properly worn on the back of the leg)

obviously, it depends on the way the stirrup is worn, on how high it is pulled up, but the smaller opening will yield less visible white undersock

ricko or someone else might be a better judge, but i’d say the braves are either 7″ or 9″, which the royals are probably 5″ and the cowboys are likely 4″

[quote comment=”382448″]but to say everyone should use the same clubs (which in and of itself isn’t a bad argument) by extension, means you want the equipment by all the other sports to be identical as well — like same bat, helmet, pads, sneakers & stick for the team sports[/quote]

I’m just looking for a happy medium between the extreme you’re mentioning and the extreme proposed by the ads you see on TV: “Use our clubs/cars/sneakers/bats and any schlub can play as well as (fill in the name of the appropriate star athlete here).”

I’m thinking back to when I played baseball and softball. Sometimes I brought my own stuff, other times I used what was available at the game. Whatever, I just did the best I could with what was offered.

[quote comment=”382448″][quote comment=”382445″]No, I’m saying they all use the same ball or puck. I didn’t mention uniforms. Of course the clothing (including shoes) doesn’t have to be the same. And yes, the clubs, sticks, bats, etc. need to be sized properly.

With golf and racing, it just seems that more emphasis is placed on the equipment. I’m saying give everyone the same car and issue out the same (again, sized to fit) set of clubs. Then let’s see who’s the best.[/quote]

yeah…i edited my post to say they all (basically) use the same golf ball

i don’t much care for NASCAR/indy/formula 1, so i’ll stick to golf

but you cannot compare the EQUIPMENT used by golfers (and call for standardization) as a valid argument — if you want to make everyone play a titlist pro v1 and only that ball, then i’ll agree your argument has validity

but to say everyone should use the same clubs (which in and of itself isn’t a bad argument) by extension, means you want the equipment by all the other sports to be identical as well — like same bat, helmet, pads, sneakers & stick for the team sports

das all[/quote]

I think you can call for golf club standardization, at least in the heads of the clubs, which was the issue at hand in that article. Either make them all the same… or let them use whatever the hell they want. The idea of banning one particular club style because it just happens to actually be more effective is stupid. Isn’t part of the strategy of the game having a set of clubs that plays into your strengths?

[quote comment=”382454″]
I think you can call for golf club standardization, at least in the heads of the clubs, which was the issue at hand in that article. Either make them all the same… or let them use whatever the hell they want. The idea of banning one particular club style because it just happens to actually be more effective is stupid. Isn’t part of the strategy of the game having a set of clubs that plays into your strengths?[/quote]

if you want to argue for club standardization, then im all for that

the point of the article, tho, was pointing out that these u-grooves give guys who can bomb it off the tee, but without much accuracy, an unfair advantage, because they aren’t being penalized as they should be for finding the rough

so, that’s not really “playing to your strength” (hitting it long, but not ncessarily straight), because that supposed to be a bad thing; the u-groove wedges allow guys who are long and wide to go pin hunting when they would, with normal clubs, be lucky to stop it on the green at all

personally, i say let them use any and every advantage they can get — including smaller and more tightly wound balls, illegal wedges, one “gotcha” per round, and let the designers put windmills on the fairway

or…make everyone use the same set of sticks

As a long time CHawks fan, I like the nice sleeve stripes+logo and, wait wait……. players are asking me what a sleeve is. Oops. Also as a new Sounders fan I should point out that the nationally and perhaps rationally unpopular Rave Green is popular here, so those of you in the near to each other states may be seeing more of the neon hue than you care to.

Also love the Sand and camo San Diego tweaks, the blue not so much. Sand is a great color, I wish the M’s would adopt the similar cream white for their home wear like the Pilots of old.

*Clint Glaze just emailed me a correction to his Padres Camo tweak:

“A sharp-eyed Uniwatcher pointed out that my MARPAT camo for the Padres uni tweak was running the wrong direction. Attached is the corrected file. I hope you are able to post this, or just swap out the file.”

The new version — also corrected in the main article.

Bruins wearing the yellow Winter Classic special alternate jerseys, without the Fenway patch. I think we can now unequivocally call this a not-supposed-to-be-allowed fourth jersey, not just a one-off.

Clint,

I appreciate the spirit of your suggestion of a “current and correct” camo pattern for the Padres’ camo alternates, but I see two problems:

First, MARPAT (the pattern you selected as an example) is a trademarked pattern, meaning that the Padres could not use it without the Marine Corps’ authorization. We Marines are pretty picky about who gets to wear our uniforms, and using one of the many MARPAT knock-offs would probably going to get the Padres in trouble. I don’t know if the Navy’s NWU pattern or the Army’s ACU pattern is likewise trademarked, but I would assume so.

Secondly, the Padres’ use of a generic camo pattern means that their tribute to the military isn’t service-specific. When I was stationed in the San Diego area I always attended Military Opening Day, and I never thought the camo unis were disrespectful because they didn’t use the same camo pattern I wore at work. If they were to wear a specific service’s camo – the Corps’ MARPAT, say – I think that would actually be more disrespectful to fans from other branches of the military, particularly the Navy since San Diego’s a huge Navy town as well. Better to keep it somewhat generic in order not to imply favoritism.

All of that said, the Padres do need to make that uni consistent. I thought they looked best when they used the desert tri-color top; the woodland tiger stripe they wore one year just didn’t look right. I’ve seen members of all branches wear the tri-colors, and it’s a pretty sharp-looking pattern, so I’d suggest the Padres continue to use that for their camo alternates.

One of the great logos. The Havana Sugar Kings…

link

Happy Birthday, Paul.

link is a 5″

[quote comment=”382454″][quote comment=”382448″]but to say everyone should use the same clubs (which in and of itself isn’t a bad argument) by extension, means you want the equipment by all the other sports to be identical as well — like same bat, helmet, pads, sneakers & stick for the team sports

das all[/quote]

I think you can call for golf club standardization, at least in the heads of the clubs, which was the issue at hand in that article. [/quote]

That’s what I meant, The Jeff – standard club heads, not so much the length of the clubs. Thanks.

While there may be several different brands of baseball bats, they all look the same, eh? Should be the same with golf. Lengths and grips can be adjusted according to the comfort of the player, but otherwise the playing field is level. Oh, and just as in baseball, the officials should supply the balls at a golf tourney.

Light vs. light game in the NCAA tourney as Georgia Tech takes on An Ohio State University:
link

[quote comment=”382473″]Phil,
I don’t know how I missed that North Face comment yesterday. My apologies. In my defense, I have the attention span of an 8 year old.[/quote]

no worries, i was just bustin’ your…

wait, what?

[quote comment=”382470″][quote comment=”382454″][quote comment=”382448″]but to say everyone should use the same clubs (which in and of itself isn’t a bad argument) by extension, means you want the equipment by all the other sports to be identical as well — like same bat, helmet, pads, sneakers & stick for the team sports

das all[/quote]

I think you can call for golf club standardization, at least in the heads of the clubs, which was the issue at hand in that article. [/quote]

That’s what I meant, The Jeff – standard club heads, not so much the length of the clubs. Thanks.

While there may be several different brands of baseball bats, they all look the same, eh? Should be the same with golf. Lengths and grips can be adjusted according to the comfort of the player, but otherwise the playing field is level. Oh, and just as in baseball, the officials should supply the balls at a golf tourney.[/quote]
*Opinion from a golf-ignorant Uni Watch reader alert*
Disagree.
Ball choice is just as important, personal, and game-changing as club choice. There is no such thing as a universal ideal ball, just an ideal ball for each individual player. (Contrast this to U-grooves, which sound like a performance enhancer to me, the way they apparently fix accuracy while maintaining distance.)
If you standardize clubs AND balls, add that to the course everybody plays at once, and you don’t have a “best-performing golfer” tournament, you have a coronation for the one player who lucks out with the correct course/ball/club combination while some golfers might as well be eliminated before play starts.

As a Padre fan for over 30 years, I like the sand colored uniforms, although the tweeks are also nice.
The blue alternates don’t do anything for me, but whatever.
However, the Padres will be wearing throw back uniforms for every Thursday home game (1984 once, the rest late 70’s, I think).
And there is huge local support for a return to the old color scheme.
The new ownership group has banished the ‘P’ initial in favor of the interlocking SD, since they want to brand San Diego as well as the Padres.
They have also created a military logo (link) which is available on hats, shirts, sweatshirts, etc. I have seen it on quite a few people even though it’s only been on sale since last month.
But more importantly, I think the new ownership may well consider returning to some variation on the old colors when they redo the uniforms. They seem really interested in what the fans want at the Park and the fans do support the old colors.
Just my 2 cents>

This is the 1969 Padres uniform set:

link

Happy Birthday Paul! Hope you had a good one! And thank you for Uni Watch!

[quote comment=”382462″]Bruins wearing the yellow Winter Classic special alternate jerseys, without the Fenway patch. I think we can now unequivocally call this a not-supposed-to-be-allowed fourth jersey, not just a one-off.[/quote]
I’m gonna make a bold prediction. They ditch the black third jersey and next year, the Winter Classic uni is their official third.

You read it here first, folks.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Shockingly, I’m having a tough time finding photos of this event…

When I was at the gym today, one of the TVs was tuned to a PBA tour event (the Go RVing Match Play Championship) and one of the bowlers was wearing a great Ohio flag-themed shirt.

I didn’t see a clear enough shot of it to be able tell if it was a true bowling shirt or more of a golf-type shirt, but think link meets link.

[quote comment=”382465″][quote comment=”382451″][quote comment=”382449″]I can’t believe I’ve been reading all this time and never posted before.

Since the Stirrup Brain Trust hangs out here, I figured I’d ask this here.

I’m having difficulty figuring out what stirrup opening sizes mean on a real person (4″, 7″, etc.)

For a visual reference, what would the sizes be in these pictures?

A: link?

B: link?

C: link?

Thanks![/quote]
At a quick glance, I’d say A and B are 7s and C is a 5.[/quote]
i think james nailed it. but i am not convinced that the brave isn’t a 5 as well. and i can assure you of this, it really depends on which of the link gets the gig on the assembly line at tck, there can be deviation.[/quote]

Here is the chart I downloaded from Twin City Knitting a long time ago (took out all the stripes at the time to avoid things that could be visually misleading.
link

I’d say the three photos are…
Braves…7″
Royals…5″
Okla. St…4″ (and the right one is on backwards, or has slouched badly).

—Ricko

[quote comment=”382485″][quote comment=”382484″]one of the bowlers was wearing a great Ohio flag-themed shirt.

I didn’t see a clear enough shot of it to be able tell if it was a true bowling shirt or more of a golf-type shirt, but think link meets link.[/quote]

i’m gonna make a bold prediction. jim vilk will wear that[/quote]

Ohio themed? I’d rather wear a PA, VA or Alaska themed shirt.

[quote comment=”382477″]i say they all have to play these:

driver: nike SQ DYMO 380 (10.5 degrees; with mitsubishi diamana whiteboard 83g shaft)

fairway woods: nike SQ II 15° 3-wood with mitsubishi diamana blueboard and nike SQ II 19° 5-wood

irons: nike VR TW blades (2-PW)…all irons are 1 degree upright, have D4 swingweight, standard size tour velvet grips and true temper dynamic gold X-100 shafts.

wedges: nike VR 56° sand wedge and nike SV 60° lob wedge

putter: scotty cameron GSS newport 2 putter (standard loft and lie, 35 inches long)

i mean, that sounds fair, right?[/quote]

I got that same glossed-over look when people start talking about car engines…

One thing I do know, there’s one and only one putter:
link

[quote comment=”382487″]Between the flea market balls or the abandoned ones we find out of bounds, I never know what I’m getting.[/quote]

and by making a statement like that, you’re also saying you have no idea what you’re doing, and you’re playing the game for pure fun (or frustration, from the sound of it)

i don’t begrudge you that, but even a shitty golfer like myself can shave a few strokes with a decent ball and good clubs — and they do make a difference; to a touring pro, they make the difference between a paycheck and a friday night flight back home

the u-grooves are a different beast tho…entirely — they violate the “spirit” of golf in that a bad shot isn’t penalized…now, it’s not cheating, but what it does is allows you to step up to the box and rip it, with nary a care as to how deep you put it in the rough, since, unless you’re buried in 3 foot zoysia, your wedge shot still stands a great chance of sticking for a 18″ gimme…and that aint right

[quote comment=”382493″]Sorry I haven’t jumped in the mix Phil. Looks like yesterday’s Ping Eye II lead is still getting comments. Guess I ought to throw my pony in the race. Well, I played the eye II back in college. Kept the sandy around for a number of years before switching to the Cleveland. The square grooves certainly help back a ball up or stop the ball tight on a slick bent grass green. If you are in the rough, yeah you might get better wood on the ball but you still have to hit it straight. So does it give an advantage, only if the player has confidence that it does. The players are too good out there to be chastising Phil (Mickelson, not Hecken) for playing by the rules. The rules may be dumb, but they are the rules. You think Ken Linseman worried about that in hockey? Gaylord Perry in Baseball? Jack Tatum in football? In 2010 Golf is simply another sport. It has its nuiances but it is big time money. Scott McCarron was being a total baby for getting on Phil. Shut up and play. He could have played the same club too – although he got Phil to change. As for the grooves, that is hardly technology. Technology is a new kevlar boron titanium graphite plultonium perimeter weighted torque tested gummy shaft. Square grooves are hardly that. I say make it all legal. As for standardizing equipment – SCREW THAT! That’s part of the game – finding the right bat, stick, or club. Hell, blaming Ping every time I miss a three footer 8 inches to the right and then blaming Calloway for the same thing after I switch is what I want the right to do. The companies also want the same thing, that is me going out and buying another putter. Standardizing equipment would be fought by every player on the tour. Can Ben Crenshaw not putt with his old Wilson 8802? Imagine taking away Jack’s huge putter, I think it was a MacGregor, he won the 86 Masters with. Yeah, I bought one shortly after, I think it’s still in the basement somewhere. The equipment is part of the player. Part of his uniform, individuality, personality. There are enough robots on tour today, let’s leave some hint of character in the game. Should there be limitations placed on equiment, sure. No Robin Hood balls. No obvious moon metals that make the ball go 200% further. However, if people are hitting it further, and they are, courses need to plant more trees. Nothing harder than hitting a fairway 15 yards wide. For some of the same reasons most of us tend to dislike Nike’s takeover, let’s keep the standardized clones away and the human element in as long as we can. Wow, that was waaaaay too long.[/quote]

wow

so what you’re saying is phil is better than ben, yes?

[quote comment=”382464″]Clint,

I appreciate the spirit of your suggestion of a “current and correct” camo pattern for the Padres’ camo alternates, but I see two problems:

First, MARPAT (the pattern you selected as an example) is a trademarked pattern, meaning that the Padres could not use it without the Marine Corps’ authorization. We Marines are pretty picky about who gets to wear our uniforms, and using one of the many MARPAT knock-offs would probably going to get the Padres in trouble. I don’t know if the Navy’s NWU pattern or the Army’s ACU pattern is likewise trademarked, but I would assume so.

Secondly, the Padres’ use of a generic camo pattern means that their tribute to the military isn’t service-specific. When I was stationed in the San Diego area I always attended Military Opening Day, and I never thought the camo unis were disrespectful because they didn’t use the same camo pattern I wore at work. If they were to wear a specific service’s camo – the Corps’ MARPAT, say – I think that would actually be more disrespectful to fans from other branches of the military, particularly the Navy since San Diego’s a huge Navy town as well. Better to keep it somewhat generic in order not to imply favoritism.

All of that said, the Padres do need to make that uni consistent. I thought they looked best when they used the desert tri-color top; the woodland tiger stripe they wore one year just didn’t look right. I’ve seen members of all branches wear the tri-colors, and it’s a pretty sharp-looking pattern, so I’d suggest the Padres continue to use that for their camo alternates.[/quote]

That’s all very good info- stuff I didn’t realize. I guess it makes more sense why they use what they use. I definitely see your point about respect. Thanks for the insight. I guess the one thing we all agree on is to match those darn pants!

[quote comment=”382497″][quote comment=\”382455\”]Absolutely love the Padre uniform tweaks, Clint. Growing up, the friar swinging the bat logo was one of my favorites – link . I feel like the Pads have gone away with that and aren\’t really the Friars anymore, they\’re the San Diego Beaches or some crap like that.

Have you happen to create any Chargers uni tweaks?[/quote]

As a matter of fact, I do. They were posted in the NFL Jersey Tweak contest on Uniwatch. I think the easiest way to find that is to search this site (on the right bar) for my name.

I just switched out the yellow for metallic gold and removed the contrasting panels on the jerseys and pants. That\’s just one idea that I ran with for the contest so if I had won, the prize would have still been recognizable as a Chargers jersey. :P[/quote]

here ya go

for the record, i had clint’s jersey as one of MY finalists, but the crackhead panel didn’t agree with me

Guess the game: link.