Skip to content

Seattle Party Report


Click to enlarge

The shot you see above nicely captures the spirit at the latest Uni Watch party, which took place back on Monday night in Seattle. From left to right, those lower legs belong to Patrick Nuss, Peter Woychick, the New Girl, Gina Nuss, myself, Scott Turner, and Patrick Fleming.

Want to see more than just shins? Let’s take a look at who was in attendance and what they wore for the occasion:

• John Kimmerlein wore this groovy Mariners basketball warm-up top. Then he removed it to reveal an Orioles throwback jersey, with matching O’s stirrups. Nicely done!

• Here’s Pete Woychick, looking sharp in a Minneapolis Millers jersey with matching stirrups. The dress shoes work surprisingly well in this context, no?

• I really liked Patrick Fleming’s old-school wool cycling jersey. (But as you might expect, I loved his stirrups even more.)

• Jon Horton decided to mess with my head a bit by wearing a purple-inclusive jersey with Day-Glo footwear.

• Back in the 1990s, I used to trade zines with a guy from Portland named Steve Mandich, who did a great zine about Evel Knievel. These days he does an excellent blog about Ichiro. We’ve been emailing each other for years but had never met in person, and I didn’t even realize he’d moved to Seattle, so it was a big surprise when he introduced himself to me at the party (while wearing a very handsome Hiroshima Carp T-shirt, plus he had a jacket with a cool little Canucks patch). Great to finally meet you, Steve!

• I enoyed talking with Jon Eidukas, who showed up in a Seattle Thunderbirds hockey jersey.

• Austin Taylor went the minimalist route, wearing a simple BYU T-shirt. But he brought along some amazing uni drawings from his youth, which I spent quite a bit of time marveling over. He’s promised to scan them for me, so you’ll be seeing them on the site soon.

• Matt Wilemski wore an Iowa State BP jersey, which he says he picked up for just $5 at and end-of-season uni/equipment sale.

• Eric Smallman wore something that doesn’t show up very often at Uni Watch parties: a bowling T-shirt. (Good luck with the hip surgery, Eric.)

• It’s always a pleasure to see Jim Hamerlinck, one of the nicest and most longstanding readers of the site. No jersey for him, but that’s fine.

• I loved Gina Nuss’s cycling jersey with matching socks. (Thanks for getting me that beer, Gina!)

• Gina came with her husband, Patrick Nuss, who wore a cycling jersey that he designed himself.

As you can see in that last photo, Patrick was holding a Uni Watch membership card that matched his jersey. That card was created for him on the spot by Scott M.X. Turner. As you can see, it turned out great. I had my laminator with me, so I laminated it and Patrick went home with his new card, just like that.

Patrick was one of five attendees who signed up for Scott’s hand-drawn cards. Here are the others:

•  Jon Eidukas cued up an image on his phone for Scott to use as reference. Once again, the results looked swell.

•  Eric Smallman gave Scott a printout of an AMF bowling display of a 4-7-10 split and then had Scott replace the “AMF” lettering with Eric’s initials — nice.

•  Matthew Eng ordered a card based on a 1962 Washington State University basketball jersey.

•  And someone else took advantage of the party’s temporary purple amnesty eruv to get this 1969 Vikings treatment, but I can’t recall who that was either. Fill me in!

(Speaking of the purple thing, I had lifted the purple ban for the party because I thought someone would probably want a University of Washington card. But nobody did. Go figure.)

It was pretty special watching Scott make these — talented fella. And the five hand-drawn cards have all been added to the membership design gallery, incidentally.

As for me, I wore one of my Durene basketball warm-ups. And when I got home from Seattle, Pete Woychick had a really nice thank-you image waiting for me. Thanks, Pete, and thanks also to everyone else who came out — it was a great time.

(Extra-special thanks to Jim McCabe, Melanie Bonanno, Richard McCabe, and the New Girl for having my back. You’re all aces.)

+ + + + +

Every Dog Has Its Day (and sometimes that day arrives a week early): UConn had been planning to unveil the new branding for its athletic department on April 18. But that schedule was scrapped when a series of leaks began appearing yesterday afternoon. That prompted the university to formally announce the new look a few hours later.

“The leaked renditions were not the first impression we wanted people to have,” says Kyle Muncy, who handles UConn’s trademark licensing and branding. “We decided to unveil the logo [on Thursday] to make sure people had the full color version and could form their opinion with complete and accurate information. We are excited about change and think others will be too. But, we wanted them to be seeing what we are seeing, not just a partial view from the leaked image.”

All the leaks and espionage and changed unveiling schedules seem like a lot of fuss for a logo that looks so generic — no character, no charm. It’s T.G.I.Husky. Also, it looks a lot like the Nordiques’ unused 1995 prototype. (Was that one supposed to be a husky or a wolf?)

Reader Brian Jud has noticed something else about the logo: “It’s similar to an earlier version that UConn used years ago, as seen on this sweatshirt I’ve had in my attic for years.” I like that sweatshirt version a lot better. But hey, I’m not the target demographic here. Right?

+ + + + +

Screen shot 2012-08-28 at 4.11.39 PM.png

Show & Tell update: Photos, objects, and stories from the latest round of my monthly Show & Tell event are up now on the S&T site. Enjoy.

+ + + + +

Uni Watch News Ticker: Indians President Mark Shapiro gave an entertainingly mush-mouthed defense of Chief Wahoo the other day (from Peter Pattakos). … I had already mentioned that the Rockies and Mets would be wearing throwbacks next Tuesday. But here’s a twist: Even though the game is in Colorado, the Rockies will wear gray and the Mets will wear white. That’s because the game will be marking the 20th anniversary of the first game in Rockies history, which took place at Shea (and I should know, because I was there). … Get this: Jason Day, Sergio Garcia, and Dustin Johnson all wore the same Adidas shirt at the Masters yesterday. Lame-o, although I guess we should be glad it’s not a Fruit Stripe design (from Dave Rakowski). … New basketball court design for Nebraska. … It’s a little hard to see, but the guy on the right has his jersey held together by safety pins. Further details here (from Phillip Garza). … Seriously garish new Rugby Sevens kit for England. I do like the socks, though (from George Chilvers). … Stan Capp was watching Family Feud and saw a family wearing NY Rangers-style jerseys. … Rick DiRubbo has noticed something about Cal’s athletic rebrand: “The headline on that page says, ‘Respect the past, represent the future.’ Syracuse football used this same slogan about 10 years ago. There were posters and billboards all over with that slogan. I don’t have the poster anymore, but here is an article that mentions it in the fourth paragraph.” … Russ Havens is holding a vote to determine the best-looking NBA season ticket design. … The Vikings’ equipment manager says they’ll be going to a more traditional look. … Check out these rejected ideas that were proposed for Canada’s flag (from Kurt Esposito). … Here are the Rays in their snappy letterman jackets (from Cork Gaines). … The new White Sox road pants striping has inspired a lengthy discussion forum thread (from Jason Rosko). … Argyle-patterned end zone lettering for UNC’s spring game (from Matt Cline). … Been a while since we’ve seen any cheesecake-style portraits by Rob Ullman. Here’s a selection of his latest work. … A Bob Gibson statue has been unveiled in Gibson’s native Omaha. “I love the detail on his uniform, though the birds on the jersey look to be more of the current look than what Gibson would have worn in his playing days,” says Jeff Funke. … Brewers will be wearing 1913 throwbacks on May 5. No uniform photos yes, but they’ll presumably look like the ones on this bobblehead (from Chance Michaels). … The Blues will wear white at home on Sunday (from Ryan Raymond). … The whole “We won the championship, so let’s wear gold lettering” thing is spreading to the minor leagues. The Springfield Cardinals, who won the AA Texas League title last year, wore that jersey last night (from Todd Dole). … One person’s (very bad) idea to rescue the Postal Service: put the Nike logo, and other corporate advertising, on stamps (from Paul Lee). ”¦ Here’s more info on Michigan repurposing Oregon State jerseys as orange “no contact” QB practice jerseys (from Steve Ceruolo). ”¦ New rugby jersey for South Africa (for real this time). ”¦ Homewood High School, from Alabama, played a game at historic Rickwood Field in Birmingham on Tuesday, and several players opted to mark the occasion by wearing striped stirrups (from Matt Wannemuehler).

Comments (148)

    Whoever was calling The Masters on ESPN Radio yesterday was describing the golfer’s wardrobes. Pretty humorous in the voice they use.

    I was at that first Rockies-Mets game too; in fact it was the first time I sat in the press box Shea.

    I figured the anniversary of that game was the rationale behind the throwback game, but that’s really interesting that the Rockies are wearing the road unis and the Mets the corresponding homes. Has any team done that before? Only slightly disappointed because I prefer the “New York” swoosh script to the “Mets” swoosh script (I always like the road unis better than the homes, for some reason, at least in baseball), and also because I’ll be in L.A. next week so I might not get to watch it.

    I doubt, of course, that they’ll go the full nine and play as if the Mets are the home team, viz., have the Mets bat in the bottom of the inning. I wonder if MLB would allow that if they even wanted to do it. For example, could the Mets reciprocate and play as the visiting team against the Rockies at Citi Field later this season (wearing the 1993 road jerseys)?

    the Rockies are wearing the road unis and the Mets the corresponding homes. Has any team done that before?

    I can only think of one – in 1993, the Brewers and Rangers did a home-and-home TBTC series with 1920s-inspired designs. Because they used the same uniforms for both games, the Brewers ended up wearing gray at County Stadium.

    Interested to see also if the caps and lettering will be in the ever-so-slightly-darker blue that the team used in ’93-94.

    If those are, in fact, the actual jerseys being to be worn on Tuesday, I give the Rockies alot of credit for actually getting it “right”. The entire picture which is posted on their Facebook site and not through Instagram even has the “Inaugural Year 1993” patch on the Rockies’ right sleeve. The silver in the Rockies lettering didn’t change to solid purple until 1995, and they also lost the purple/gray/purple sleeve cuff at that same time.

    Unfortunately, I’m venturing that this is an old picture from 1993, and they’ll look “close” to it, but not exact.

    I think those are current, Glenn. The Mets #6 jersey appears to have “BYRD” on the back (judging from the stitching you can see), not “ORSULAK”.

    John. This is a debate I’ve been having.. I grew up a white at home but have gotten use to the colors (and being from Maryland ~ ROCK the RED has gotten me).. I think the best would be color on color, like soccer, and in cases where there would be a problem one of the two could switch ~ so if Detroit was playing the Washington (red v red) one would switch.

    Agreed: So long as the ice is white, color-on-color is ideal for hockey. Primary and change kit, with soccer-like rules on what constitutes contrast.

    It might be a tad inconvenient for the equipment managers, having to lug two sets of helmets, sweaters, and socks. That said, it would have the advantage of being pretty much what was done in the beginning of the NHL.

    If I’m an Adidas rep, and Michigan is my account, then there’s no way in H. E. Double-hockey sticks that I’d allow a Nike jersey to even share the locker room, press releases, newspaper articles, blog reports, pictures, social media, the bodies of QB’s, and yada-yada with my biggest account! Make that ANY account! This is as HUGE fail for Adidas, which is only fitting…they have drenched the UM Athletic Department with horrible looking garb from Day 1. Can’t wait till they are canned.

    This is as HUGE fail for Adidas…

    Or maybe it’s just a welcome example of two schools working together, regardless of who supplies their uniforms, because working cooperatively is more important than corporate divisiveness.

    Just a thought.

    People mentioned in reply to my comment yesterday that there’s a connection between the two programs, as Hoke is a former Beavers assistant coach and their AD was formerly at Michigan.

    Though I still think there may be something to Michigan investigating their options for when the Adidas contract is up in 2015.

    Then I actually read today’s article…

    An Oregon State spokesman said Michigan contacted them for the jerseys because U-M equipment manager Jon Falk knows Beavers equipment manager Arnold Alcantar.

    Still curious that they did pick Oregon State to go to for this favor.

    But people who care about such minutiae are a tiny, tiny minority. I mean, they managed to slap an adidas logo on it, and it’ll never be worn in a game.

    Great point Scotty, and everyone else. The weird thing about them saying that they knew each other is that so many equipment managers know each other. Even if they did know each other, there should have still been plenty of Adidas school’s equipment managers. So many oddities in this story.

    Also interesting that they didn;t care the donor school’s initials are ‘OSU’. Just no red!

    Disagree completely. (And I’m not one who loves the “new era” of mascot logo design … i.e., Uga is a simple upgrade but still ripe with design problems, for example.)

    However, this UCons (my emphasis for their penchant for cheating under Calhoun) mark is actually quite solid. I have a husky mix for a pet, so I stare at this type of face a lot!

    What’s good: it’s both playful and serious (or intimidating). The coy smile is quite genuine for the breed.

    The lines are very precised without being overwhelming (Uga, Jacksonville, Carolina Panthers, even Oregon St to some degree have all had this problem in recent unveilings … lines that are too heavy giving it a bloated appearance).

    This mark is right on with appropriate line weight. The use of color is also refined and appropriate … just a hint of red, and an even more subtle hint of light blue for the eyes.

    I can see how some think it’s ‘generic’ … I’d refer to it more as ‘simple.’ And in this case, simple is good (because it’s clean and has a crisp appearance). It will make for smooth placement on uniforms and apparel (which, of course, Nike seems to place as the highest priority in these redesigns).

    I bellyache about what Nike did to Uga, the Purdue Boilermaker Special, among many many others, but they hit this one on the mark. It’s a strong icon, and a far superior improvement over their previous “mutt” of an icon.

    PS, it doesn’t bare ANY resemblance to the Nordiques’ jersey mentioned (a generic Atari-like design, if ever there was one), nor the blob of design Jud mentioned (a printer’s nightmare).

    Come on, guys. Not even close.

    I liked the former doggie, both for its friendly demeanor and the tilt of its head. But this one ain’t bad at all, and Scotty is right about that “coy smile.” He’s also right about Calhoun, but hey.

    Please explain how the Nordiques prototype logo looks like Atari. That is one of the most ridiculous claims I have ever read in the comments on this site.

    That, and while far from identical, the two logos are similar in that they are both forward-facing images of the head of a member of the Canis lupus family. And the Nords’ unusued logo is the first thing I thought of when I saw the new UConn logo.

    Basic lines (all triangles). No curvature. No definition. That Nordiques logo is what I’d term as “generic.” It could work on Atari, because there’s no definition to it. (Okay, Atari’s a ’75-’85 fixture, and that Nordiques mark feels ’87-’97-like … so let’s call it “Nintendo generic”?)

    The new UCons logo is far from that. The subtle smile, the teeth, the cowl … all far more defined. Has a pretty decent stroke around it, too. Not too heavy like the Uga. Everybody has their opinions, but design-wise, this one isn’t an A+ but it isn’t below a B.

    Horrible, horrible logo for UConn. Also, all teams will have that hideous logo on their uniform, whereas now teams mixed it up (football had the block C, men’s basketball had the interlocking UC, women’s basketball had the C superimposed on the baskrtball, baseball had a gothic C, and other sports had some combination of these) And also all uniforms will say “UCONN” on the front, whereas some said “CONNECTICUT” now. Exact uniforms will be unveiled before the fall.

    Yeah, it’s a shame. I have absolutely no connection to UConn, but that old Husky logo was a classic. Why does EVERYTHING have to be “angry” nowadays? Has everyone forgotten that sports are supposed to be, I don’t know… fun. Of course, this being the era of “pro-combat”, I think I already know the answer to that. Sports are war, man.

    Knowing how these things work, in ten years time merchandise with that old Husky (Johnathon, I think?) will be in high demand for its retro quality.

    Stupid, stupid, stupid.

    In order for something to be officially vintage it has to be 15 years old or older. (Vintage is how we in the business refer to what you call retro.) But because I’m always ahead of everybody else, things start looking vintage to me at the 13 year mark.

    I’m sure it is all relative… A while back I read about some college baseball player who was excited about his team wearing “old-school” uniforms… from the 1980s. Huh. I thought old-school meant 1950s or earlier.

    Not really. It’s pretty much the font they’ve been using for some time now. It seems that they’ve just standardized the colors as dark blue with red trim.

    DJ is right, they’ve been using this same font since around 2003 or so when they touched up the Jonathan logo used previously until yesterday.

    I don’t know, I like the new husky. The current one looks more like a collie to me, though YMMV.

    Also, I like the 1960s husky with the musket.

    While reading the article on the Indians president, stating how they want to promote the C hat because it represents Cleveland, I started thinking, why do we have mascots at all? Why aren’t the Redskins just Washington? Why do we need a nickname? That would solve the identity crisis of the Baltimore/Indianapolis Colts. The old Colts would have just been Baltimore and the Ravens would also still just be Baltimore. It would also solve the Cleveland Indians/Washington Redskins issues. The Houston Texans pretty much have already done this. Not to mention the best logos are city initials….the D for the Detroit Tigers is better than any Tiger cartoon they have ever used. The NY for the Yankees. Just a thought.

    Of course, apparently the Nats’ Curly W is getting pretty popular for representing West *something* as opposed to Washington. Some Nats fans have noted that they’re getting looked over by bouncers as potential gang members.

    But think of the reduced merchandising opportunities! Plus, neither the Indians nor the Redskins actually have any interest in solving the problem – they just want the people who care about ethnic caricatures to shut up and people who’d throw a fit over dropping the caricatures to get old and die.

    And a nickname-less Baltimore football team would be confused with the nickname-less Baltimore football team of 1994.

    I mean, no team *needs* anything. We certainly don’t *need* sports. But we have them, and overall, nicknames do more good than harm (although I do like the European model where all nicknames are informal).

    Agree…but also I should have added for full disclosure: I live near Washington so I have to cheer for Nats, Wiz and Redskins. Maybe I would have a different opinion if I lived somewhere with cooler nicknames.

    It’s interesting that the Wizards serves as an example of a reactionary nickname that tried to be sensitive and failed.

    Anyway, I live in the Washington area too, and my Carolina Panthers fanhood notwithstanding, I don’t think I could ever feel good about cheering for the Redskins because of the nickname. Nationals are fine – it’s traditional, it’s region appropriate and inoffensive.

    But you know, you *do* have D.C. United, nickname-free since 1996.

    Maybe the problem with “Washington Wizards” is that it gets shortened to “Wiz” — who want to root for a team that sounds like a nine year old peeing?

    When you are bringing a child into the world, you spend hours thinking about names. When you grew up with parents who saddled you with an easily-abused name (pity the Gaylords, the Poindexters, the Corts of the world), you spend an equal amount of time working through every conceivable adulteration of those names, trying to find one that isn’t going to result in some horrible nickname.

    Were I ever an owner, I wouldn’t touch a nickname like Wizards with a ten foot pole.

    I tend to think you’re right, although the Kansas City Wizards did a pretty good job with it. Then again, that’s a powerful cultural touchstone they could tap.

    You’re right about the planning, though. When my wife was pregnant, I researched each of our name choices to find every last connotation, reference or association that we might later regret. Much like branding a team, I suspect.

    Imagine being saddled with a name like Gaylord Fokker.

    BTW, how exactly is “Cort” bad (or given to ridicule)? Actually sounds like a pretty cool name (as does “Chance”). I’m reminded of the old Simpsons episode when Marge and Homer are trying to decide whether “Bart” is a bad name for a kid, and Homer can’t think of anything “bad” that would rhyme with Bart…


    But then, even Kansas City made the mistake of launching as “Wiz”, changing to “Wizards”, and then scrapping the theme altogether with “Sporting Kansas City”.

    Meanwhile, Dallas Burn, the other half of the infamous “Wiz-Burn” duo, ended up going as “FC Dallas”, and Toronto launched without a nickname.

    Thing about KC that’s neither here nor there – a lot of Brits mistakenly call the team “Kansas”, because they think “City” is an added appellation, like “Manchester City”.

    Well, at least they moved to the Kansas side of the river when they were still the Wizards; otherwise, it’d be rather silly.

    Your question makes me wonder how similar baseball teams, at least, were in their early days in comparison to soccer team nicknames. Looking at many of the English clubs, their official name is ___ FC, but many fans refer to the teams by colloquial nicknames–Red Devils, Blues, Reds, Gunners, Spurs, etc.

    Looking at the original baseball club nicknames here, many of them were references to team colors (Browns, Reds, Red/White Sox, Cardinals), the league in which they played (Yankees), or a prominent person/people associated with the team (Naps, Cubs, Pirates). And I wonder how much of that grew out of simply having to distinguish between, say, two Chicago or Boston or New York baseball clubs.

    At some point, it seems choosing a nickname became a much bigger deal, and teams began to think more outside the confines of qualities unique to a particular team. Not sure when, or who was the first, though.

    There was a time when teams were identified by their location and league. Boston Americans, New York Americans etc. Not sure how or when it became necessary to “name” a team.

    One interesting note about teams being referred to by their colors happens in the Dominican Baseball League. Although teams have official nicknames like Aguilas, Leones and Tigueres, they have years been called the “amarillos” “azules” and “rojos” ( yellows, blues and reds ). It turned weird a few years when Orange ( European Telecom ) became the main sponsors of the Aguilas ( known as yellows )and the team color was changed to match Orange Corp’s colors which was of course…..well Orange!

    Yet the team is still called the yellows!!

    I thought that newspaper reporters played a hand in naming teams (baseball at least) in the early days; rather than constantly repeating the city name in their coverage of games, they would assign a nickname reflective of the city name, team colors, etc…
    Sometimes the name would catch on with the fans and ownership, sometimes with one and not the other, and sometimes not at all.
    I may be wrong, but I think the Braves is the oldest team name ‘chosen’ by team ownership rather than being bestowed upon by the press or supporters.

    Yeah, but look at Cardiff FC: 100+ years of blue and white uniforms — their nickname is “Bluebirds” — was swept away this season, as a Malaysia-based owner decided that red and white, with new logo emphasizing the Welch dragon, would play better in Asian souvenir markets.

    They’re well on their way to qualifying for the Premier League. Fans have grumbled, but really, most people are more concerned with them advancing.

    Are traditions as important now as they were 30 or 40 years ago? Everything seems to be changing.

    it didn’t become “necessary”…it evolved naturally from fans of those clubs…

    “oh, going to see new york today” can mean many more things than “going to see the mets”…now, we all understand where and what…

    every club, from baseball and football (gridiron/rugby, association, aussie rules) that were playing in the 1800’s-early 1900s developed nicknames over the years…the clubs didn’t pick the nicknames usually…either the media, or the colloquial term for how the fans referred to the team, was the source…which is why some teams have several nicknames throughout their long history…

    it didn’t become a big money marketing scheme until the last 50 years (roughly), and that has been a gradual slope (meaning that, when i was a kid, we had some things, like the nfl logo sheets, etc., but you didn’t see everyone walking around with a jersey or hat on everywhere you went, like is the case today)…

    This is how soccer teams do it. The teams are just Liverpool, United and Chelsea, but to the fans, they’re the reds, the red devils and the blues. I would like it if American sports were more like that, with names and marks that represent the cities, leaving a nickname as just that; a name that fans use to refer to the team on occasion. I find it weird when a team’s logo is just an illustration of its nickname.

    Though some nicknames *are* formalized, like Bolton Wanderers and the various clubs named Rovers and Athletic. And then they end up having informal nicknames that are based on formal nicknames, like “Trotters” for Bolton or “Latics” for the various Athletics.

    It would be cooler to go back to nicknames meaning “less than” (for lack of a better term) the city name and be just that…a nickname. I guess we have money and marketing to blame…but when and why did some teams use nicknames that do not represent their location and aren’t the best marketing tools?…I know each team has a back story to their nicknames and teams move and all (New Orleans to Utah Jazz)and the Packers and Steelers make sense and could have been created today but the Cleveland Indians? I don’t think if there was a new sports team today the owner would select “Indians” as a team name…even if there was no pressure to avoid a backlash, I think a team would not select “Indians” because it simply would not represent a large number of the people in the location and would not be flashy enough like say for example, “The Heat”.

    The reasoning that’s trotted out is that Cleveland wanted to honor Louis Sockalexis, the first Indian player in the Majors.

    Which is sort of like Detroit “honoring” Hank Greenberg with a cartoon large-nosed Hassid.

    Shouldn’t the family feud link read “NY Ranger INSPIRED jersey’s”…looks like that’s the family name…

    I saw that episode… oddly enough, they had first names on back with no numbers, even though they had sleeve numbers, a captain and an alternate.

    Those guys were also apparently fairly obsessed with certain biological functions and body parts…

    Not regularly; it happened to be what my mom put on when she was over the other night (I was ripping some of her CDs to put on her iPod).

    Yes…. it was a lot of fun sitting there next to him as he made my card, and I’m sure the other four who did the same would agree!

    I need help! I can’t find that awesome online shop that sells the retro stirrup socks so many of these fine folks are wearing. Can someone link me?

    That Bob Gibson statue seems to have been modeled on this photo:…0.0…

    Pity it wasn’t his trademark “falling off the mound” pose:…0.0…

    Though I guess structurally that might not be feasible.

    Playoff-POSITIONED, yes, but they haven’t clinched anything yet! The Rangers could still overtake them, and I’m not counting Winnipeg or New Jersey out just yet, though the Devils have fallen back of late.

    Note, though, that I’m not saying the Islanders won’t make the playoffs, just that I’m reluctant to give anybody a pass in when the races are still fairly tight.

    I’d be surprised if Boston and Anaheim have not clinched by the end of action on Saturday. In fact, all the Ducks need is for the Stars to lose to Nashville tonight.

    You have to believe in something in order to see it happen, Rob. Personally, I’d take the Islanders’ brand of hockey over the Rangers, Devils, or Senators at this point because they play up-tempo, risk/reward hockey. That’s fun hockey.

    It’s not quite playoff hockey, but it’s fun. I’ll take it.

    Bob Gibson! Sandy Koufax! Two best pitchers I ever saw. And Gibson boasted the added attraction of being one mean tough customer (on the mound, at least). The statue? Meh. But good on Omaha anyway.

    The outrage over the UCONN logo is hilarious. Especially when compared to the outrage over the new Miami Dolphins logo. As someone with absolutely no connection to UCONN, I think the new logo is great. I also like the new Dolphins logo, and I’m a Miami fan.

    The differences being that UCONN fans are complaining about the logo being too aggressive, and Miami fans complaining that their logo is not aggressive enough. Added to this is that dogs are animals that generally known for the ability to be fierce when necessary. Dolphins on the other hand are more known for being fun-loving. (yes, I know dolphins can be aggressive. I’m talking perception.)

    The root of all of this is… people fear change. Both designs, UCONN and Dolphins, have been improved. Looking forward to a couple years from now when people calm down and spend all their money on new merchandise.

    I think that’s just par for the course on the Internet. Forgive the hyperbole, but having graduated from UConn 3 years ago, it just feels like another piece of the UConn that my classmates and I know is being taken away. Couple that with the fact that I grew up with theoretically the same Jonathan logo which was introduced in the early ’90s.

    That said, I really don’t hate the new one. I compare it to the recent “Spider Man” movie: it’s just fine, but there was no reason for a new one.

    Though when I say “no reason,” I do know the reasons: Nike’s $$$, and it’s an appropriate time for a change given all the conference shuffling. Again, I don’t really think they needed a new one, but at least a change is justifiable.

    There are several things. The annual “Spring Weekend” was basically gutted a couple years ago (granted it was good for safety’s sake, but it’s still a change). New buildings on campus taking the space of nice quads. The school’s official wordmark which appears on their main website, on their letterheads, etc., was sterilized into just “UCONN” in the athletic program’s font (and don’t get me/others started on the difference between “UCONN” and the correct “UConn”). Oh, and obviously the whole Big East fiasco.

    Don’t get me wrong, I’m aware that this is just what happens over time, so I hope it doesn’t sound like I’m making a big fuss about it. All these differences aren’t huge, but in the small span of 3 years, it just feels like a lot has changed is all.

    I don’t really see the new UConn logo as aggressive. Moreso than the previous? Sure, but not overly so. It’s more realistic, I guess, but it really just looks like you’re looking a dog in the face. There’s not much added aggression there.

    Apropos of nothing, if I had the required design-y skills, I’d whip up adidas fruit stripe football unis, just for shits and giggles. I’d love to see how ugly you can make Nebraska, Notre Dame, Michigan, Tennessee, Wisconsin and UCLA look.

    Is UCONN going to have a formal reveal? A fashion show of the new uniforms?

    A couple of thoughts- the logo is very similar to U of Washington. And their 1959 logo ranks up there with the 1927 Detroit Tiger logo as one of the more classics.

    similar to an older Washington logo, maybe a secondary one….not the new one. or maybe I’m just totally confused

    I wonder if the argyle-themed end zone pattern is a hint for the new uniform design.

    I don’t mind this – Carolina football uniforms aren’t exactly iconic, and argyle has become part of the Carolina brand. And Nike’s effort with UNC has generally been clean and understated.

    It seems like whoever decided what the UConn mascot would look like back in the day didn’t know what a husky actually looks like, because the breed of dog they chose to base the logo and mascot on was actually a Samoyed.

    My friend thought the old logo looked more like an American Eskimo dog, but after reading the comments on the UConn site that officially unveiled the new logo, several people said the white dog that UConn has always used as its mascot was a Samoyed.

    So let me get this straight UConn: your nickname is Huskies, and you chose as your mascot and logo a dog that is not a husky. Now you have a mascot and logo that IS a husky, and everybody hates it.

    I think the lesson here is you can’t dramatically change your brand that all your fans love and has become iconic just because of an inaccuracy. This reminds me of when the Patriots switched from red jerseys to blue jerseys in 1993 because the British redcoats wore red. I don’t really remember much of a fuss from fans about that back then, but that was before the age of internet comments lol.

    What are some other examples of teams making changes to make their brand “more accurate”?

    Interesting you say that about the Samoyed. You’re right that it wasn’t quite based on a husky, but there are still all-white huskies. The real Jonathan (UConn’s live dog mascot) is an all-white Siberian husky (pictured here: ). It actually took them at least a couple of years to find him because his breed is so rare (plus they needed to find one with the right temperament too).

    Basically what I’m saying is, UConn students/alums/fans are used to an all-white husky, so a change from all-white is a little tough for some people to handle (I get it, but others might not).

    Is it just me or is changing the court design of your pro/college basketball team going WAY overboard, in terms of seemingly every team getting a new design every other year. Yes, yes I know the Celtics don’t change their’s, we all know that. Isn’t this a massive waste of wood and money if it’s only gonna be used for a year. Yes, yes, you can spare us the “BUT WUT ABOUT NEWSPAPERS????!!!!!!!”

    Not necessarily. Courts are shaved down a tiny amount each year for wear and tear, so they have a limited lifespan in any event. The change is limited to a new paint job, and in recent years, sometimes a different pattern of staining the floor.

    Given that the White Sox wore their usual grey tops last night with no alterations I think it is safe to infer that the pants worn this week were an aberration.

    We’ll probably see the old pants back soon. Either they forgot to pack them or they were sent to the wrong city, its a mystery but no doubt they’ll be back.

    You really think that’s more likely than them having changed the gray pants without also making the corresponding change to the gray jersey?

    Based on what we’ve seen out of the South Side in recent years, I’m not sure that I can agree.

    Well they have 7 more road games(coming up) for us to find out, you would think that playing at Cleveland would be close enough to get the correct pants there if that is the case.

    Heck, they were still playing in DC 4 nights after leaving Chicago. They could’ve sent an intern to hand-deliver the pants in his broken-down Geo Metro and they’d still have arrived in DC in plenty of time for last night’s game.

    I’m the one who posted here about the piping originally.

    The reason I did this is because the team I play on recently had a discussion about this. Our team colors are black and orange and we usually followed the Giants patterns. So in the 90’s we got 5-stripe piping: orange-black-white-black-orange and these were usually easy to order. Then the Giants changed to orange-black-orange and it was a special order to get the 5-stripe pattern and guys never bothered any more. Some guys ordered pants (each guy buys his own pants) with orange-black-orange, some with black-orange-black, some just said screw it and got a single black stripe off the rack at a store. Eventually we all just decided to go with the single black stripe because any mutli-colored stripe was usually a special order that either cost extra or caused a delay.

    And of for the last couple years it’s getting hard to find pants at stores with even the single black stripe anymore. Some guys switched to the pajamas look just to get the stripe because those were the only ones they could find.

    Then lo and behold the White Sox are now single-striped and I’d be willing to bet that it’s because Majestic either raised the price for the special striping or they had a delay getting the pants shipped. Either the Sox just said screw it or Majestic shipped the stock piping to tide them over until the correct striped pants arrived OR Majestic screwed up the order and no one noticed until it was too late.

    From the stamp article:

    You might object that this would be disrespectful to George Washington or the tufted puffin, to pick two currently available stamps. But is this necessarily so? If I buy a book about the first president or about the varieties of auks, and the name and logo of the publisher are embossed on the cover and the frontispiece, I don’t worry about whether I’ve become a toady of corporate America.

    No, no, no, no, NO!! NOT the same thing. A publisher putting its own mark on a book that it’s publishing is NOT the same as selling advertisement to a third party. Now, if Random House were to sell advertising space to Nike on a book about the Rocky Mountains, THAT would be an apt comparison.

    I own a small business. Our company mascot is a pelican (Thank you, ScottMX!)

    When we opened our doors, USPS just happened to have a stamp, featuring a brown pelican. We bought a bunch of those stamps, and used them on our billing invoices for the first few months. People liked it — we got several comments on how cool it was that the stamp echoed our logo.

    That’s a lot different than paying to slap our logo on a stamp.

    If Nike put advertising on stamps, (artistically it would be an unfortunate break with tradition, but) those stamps would be cheaper to the public since Nike is now paying to advertise on them. Say 45 cents for a Nike stamp or 48 cents for stamps with no advertising. I mean, that would make the most sense right?

    You mean just like how athletic clothing with the Nike swoosh on it is less expensive than un-branded athletic clothing, right?

    That’s an apples-and-oranges argument, as you’re comparing a maker’s mark to a paid third-party ad.

    In any case, I don’t see the USPS dropping the price of stamps; they’d most likely be looking to simply slow down the ongoing increases.

    Am I the only one moderately surprising the Vikings have been able to keep their new uniforms from leaking out? Seems like in today’s day and age pics of the unis always leak pre-unveiling.

    This would be giving vexillologists around the world fits if it had been adopted as-is. It’s far too complex a design, and the individual provincial shields are highly problematic.

    I could see the design being simplified, with plain stripes and leaves, but then you’d really just have the flag of Gabon defaced with white maple leaves.

    A coat-of-arms is a different matter from a design going across the entire flag.

    In any case, I know some vexillogical circles tend to look down upon the overabundance of state/provincial seals/coats-of-arms on those respective flags, preferring simpler yet unique designs. A popular criterion is along the lines of “Can a child draw it from memory?”

    Austin’s BYU t-shirt is from the Robbie Bosco era. Before the football bibs. Before the Insane Disembodied Cougar Head. Before Navy and Sand.

    I miss those days.

    Quick question, ordering some softball jerseys, for someone using FiNOB, how should it be printed

    A.Smith or A. Smith? Space or no space between first initial and last name?

    That Orioles uni is interesting to me, as i am a die hard Cardinals fan and think it’s kind of a ripoff. I found out about that a few weeks ago, i saw it pop up on MLB Network in some short clip. Turns out the uniform is a throwback to an Orioles design from the 30s (i think), however, the Orioles were in St. Louis at this point in history known as the Browns. The jersey was used by the Baltimore Orioles, the minor league franchise. When the Browns moved to Baltimore in the 50s, they adopted the name Orioles. The O’s have had getaway days in the 90s where they’ve worn that uniform. Kind of an interesting design, but to a Cardinals fan, the only birds that get to perch atop the bat, are red ones.

    Oliver–correct, the jersey is a recreation of the ’39 Orioles, an International League team. I am no expert, but always understood that the Cards were first with the “birds on a bat,” and still find that an iconic MLB uni. I also think that the scope of the “mascots on a bat” jerseys is kind of a hoot. Ebbets Field Flannels has great examples with the Portland Beavers, New Orleans Pelicans and Santurce Cangrajeros.

    It’s practically a crime that the minor-league Louisville Bats don’t have bats-on-a-bat jerseys.

    One clarification about items worn to the Seattle party.

    The jerseys that Gina and I are wearing are not cycling jerseys, but instead orienteering jerseys (hers from Cascade Orienteering Club, mine from Orienteer Kansas).

    Most modern orienteering jerseys are a similar to a cross between a running shirt and a bike jersey, so a lot of people think that we’re wearing cycling jerseys.

    Watching Scott draw my card was AMAZING to watch, and we had a really fun time hanging out with everyone. My wife really isn’t a Uni-Watcher, but she came along and didn’t feel out of place. I guess everyone in this little community of ours is pretty like-minded.

    This is the first time I’ve ever heard of orienteering jerseys. Then again, I haven’t done any rull-blown orienteering since I was in Scouts, and certainly haven’t been involved in any orienteering clubs. Though, I am still very much a full-blown mapgeek and roadgeek.


    I didn’t know that orienteering was a sport until college. I had earned the merit badge in scouts as a kid, and it was primarily compass based (and not really what the sport is about).

    The sport is primarily map based, and it can get pretty competitive (there’s a World Champs every year, and US and Canadian Champs, too).

    The sport is basically “What’s the best way to get to the next checkpoint, and how fast can I get there?” It’s a mixture of running on whatever: roads, trails, and oftentimes completely off-trail. It’s also referred to as “adventure running” in some circles.

    I submitted this to Paul, but figured I’d drop it here too… the AAA Lehigh Valley Iron Pigs just showed their 2013 Charity Night jerseys…

    The Miracle League (a great charity) one makes them look like they’re wearing a dress… the fauxback is a Tequila Sunrise wannabe… the football one is interesting, but a terrible font… I guess the only one truly ok with is the Bethlehem Steel one, since that’s where their name is derived from. The beach one is offensive looking, but that’s the point, I guess.

    A day or so late to the party, but I wanted to reflect on the poll ranking the baseball nicknames done by the guy who had previously issued a basketball list. No team name should ever have “Anaheim” in it. It’s accepted as an article of faith a team represents the nearest metropolitan era. Can you imagine rooting for the East Rutherford Giants or the Auburn Hills Pistons? That’s democracy gone too far! I will now cite the exception to the rule: Green Bay Packers. Can’t be making Packer fans angry.

    Why not? Anaheim is (sort of) a real city. It’s got 340,000 people. How is that any crazier than naming a baseball team after, say, Brooklyn?

    Brooklyn has a population of 2.5 million. So, your Anaheim-Brooklyn comparison isn’t really working for me…

    “temporary purple amnesty eruv” might be the best phrase I’ve ever read.

    I’m guessing most who read this website don’t know what an eruv is.

    I’m guessing most who read this website don’t know what an eruv is.

    The bigger question is whether any of them bothered to look it up.

Comments are closed.