Skip to content

Auction Action


As you’ve probably noticed in the left sidebar, our friends at Grey Flannel Auctions have another big auction underway. Here are some of the more interesting items:

• I lovelovelove this 1933 Cubs road jersey. Never seen that design before except in Okkonen’s mock-ups. (Here’s the full auction listing.)

• This is interesting: For an old-timers’ day in the 1980s, the Cardinals used jerseys with FNOB but no numbers (full listing).

• By now you’ve probably heard that Mickey Mantle used this corked bat (full listing).

• Two interesting aspect to this Vida Blue jersey: FiNOB and the A’s bicentennial patch (full listing).

• Always good to see one of the Denver Bears’ strike zone uniforms from 1952 (full listing).

• Totally digging this assortment of Brooklyn Dodgers World Series press pins (full listing). There’s also an Ebbets Field All-Star Game press pin here.

• This was in the Ticker earlier this week, but it’s worth repeating: Here’s a really unusual FNOB format (full listing). Here’s how it looked on the field.

• When you think of nickNOBs, it’s hard not to think of Pete Maravich (full listing).

• Interesting to see that the 1977 NBA All-Star Game uni had a patch on the shorts. Since the game was in Milwaukee, the patch design was a beer mug — love it (full listing). Here’s how it looked on the court.

• Captaincy designations on NBA uniforms: rare but not unheard of (full listing).

• One thing I never get tired of: the old Buffalo Braves uniforms (full listing).

Want to see more? You can browse through the entire auction catalog here.

+ + + + +


PermaRec update: The latest entry on the Permanent Record blog is about a few hundred letters written by a pair of World War II servicemen, which were found in an old hatbox that was purchased at an estate sale for $1 (shown at right). Check it out here.

+ + + + +

Uni Watch News Ticker: Redskins owner Dan Snyder is running scared. If he really felt secure in his position about the team’s name, he wouldn’t need to address it at all — he’d just carry on and ignore the whole thing. When he says, “We’ll NEVER change the name ”” you can use caps,” he’s like the guy trying to compensate for his small dick by driving an SUV with the radio turned up really loud. Better drive faster, Dan — they’re gaining on ya. … When you hear the term “baseball jacket,” you probably don’t think of these (nice find by Alan Kreit). … Here’s Cincinnati’s official sideline cap for the upcoming football season (from Mark Fightmaster). … New mascot for Northeast Ohio Medical University. “Luckily, they don’t field any teams,” says Mary Lynn Delfino. “We can only imagine the uni follies that would ensue.” … “Much like the Bills themselves, the team’s draft day war room is stuck in the late ’90s,” notes Steve Laga. … A guy in Indianapolis has designed his own soccer league (from Darin Nelson). … Brian Mazmanian reports that waitresses at Jerry Remy’s restaurant, across from Fenway Park, are wearing Red Sox-style two-in-ones. … New 1983 throwbacks for the Toronto Argonauts. … Oh baby, this has gotta be one of the most gloriously gaudy basketball uniforms I’ve ever seen. That’s the 1965-66 Oglethorpe College squad. “In my role as incoming President of the Oglethorpe Alumni Board, I am interested in seeing what it would take to outfit our team in throwbacks from this era,” says Austin Gillis. Make it happen, Austin! … There’s a case to be made for Marge Simpson appearing on the Blazers’ jerseys (from Jeremy Brahm). … Brian Codagnone sent along this photo of a very nice horse racing jockey’s saddle cloth tag. … “The Trenton Thunder retired David Ecksein’s number on Wednesday,” says Harrison Tishler. “They showed highlights from his time in Trenton, including a shot where he had no logo on his helmet.” … New helmets for several schools in the NCAA lacrosse tourney (from Matt Powers). … The Hillsboro Hops — that’s the new short-season single-A team in Oregon — will unveil their new uniforms next Thursday (from Christopher Ouellette). … New logo for 21st Century Fox. … Deadspin posted an awesome infographic yesterday showing the disgraceful truth that the highest-paid public employee in most states is a coach. … Kids today: A Montreal girl was sent home from school for wearing an Ottawa Senators jersey (from Brian Smith). … New third kit for AC Milan (from Gareth Hammond). … Nice story about a guy who used to wear his dad’s old baseball uniforms (thanks, Brinke). ”¦ Odd look last night for Marlon Byrd of the Mets, who had an orange-bodied undershirt but blue sleeves. Either that or he wore a short-sleeved orange shirt over a long-sleeved blue one. ”¦ I’ll be away from the computer almost all day (attending a wedding on a boat, then running errands, then meeting Phil at Shea for tonight’s Mets/Bucs game), so please go easy on the Ticker emails today, okay? Okay.

Looking ahead: My colleague Jim Caple and I have been working on a “Battle of the Uniforms” project that will roll out next week (similar to the “Battle of the Ballparks” series that Jim handled last year). Basically, we’ve set up a uniform bracket, and readers will get to vote on the winners. There will also be sidebars written by me and Jim, slideshows, and so on. So get ready to vote early and often.

Comments (124)

    wouldn’t say that Snyder is “running scared”. He’s just addressing something that seems to a weekly topic and confirming his stance. Only way i could see him “running scared” would be if he called a large press conference to say this. from what it reads like, he was talking to one reporter(who most likely brought the subject up) and Snyder told him his stance

    While I agree that “running scared” isn’t exactly right, I do see that the Redskins have gotten increasingly defensive and desperate in the past year.

    “Better drive faster, Dan – they’re gaining on ya”

    By “they’re,” you mean the 20% of people who actually care about this issue? Per that national poll with a decent sample size, anyway.

    I find that the best way to deal with the guy with the small dick blasting music out of his SUV is to treat him with quiet contempt. Pointing at the guy and writing about him – AGAIN AND AGAIN AND AGAIN – doesn’t really make him more of an asshole.

    But it kind of makes you an officious, nannying twat. And in the battle between “classless jerkoff” and “nannying twat,” I start to sympathize with the former. He generally doesn’t know that he is a moron.

    Whereas the latter probably should have enough of a clue to realize that the world runs a bit more smoothly WHEN YOU LEAVE OTHER PEOPLE ALONE TO LIVE THEIR LIVES AS THEY WANT TO.

    But does not, in fact, have such a clue.

    Pointing at the guy and writing about him — AGAIN AND AGAIN AND AGAIN — doesn’t really make him more of an asshole.

    Actually, I’ve rarely (if ever?) mentioned Snyder in previous posts.

    Yeah, the AGAIN AND AGAIN AND AGAIN is getting old. Probably the best post I’ve read on the subject, calling a spade a spade. “Nannying twat” vs “classless jerk off.” “Right on the mark,” Marc L.


    White privilege is the best.

    You know what I hate, besides capital letters? People braying libertarian nonsense.

    It’s hard to see how anyone objecting to a team nickname, no matter how frequently those objections are raised, is preventing that person from LIVING HIS LIFE AS HE WANTS TO. I won’t argue who’s officious and who’s nannying: those things are in the eye of the beholder.

    What bothers me is the implication that speaking out about something you find offensive is itself offensive. And that forcing a business or individual to change to conform to a societal standard is classless and nannying.
    That’s wrong.

    Even in sports, there are eight million examples of perfectly reasonable, absolutely unobjectionable ways that changing social awareness has forced change in the sports themselves. Little things, like singing the National Anthem before play. Big things, like mandatory helmets in hockey (you can’t underestimate how much that changed the sport’s culture).

    And every socially acceptable, perfectly reasonable, absolutely unobjectionable change began with some lone voice of opposition, shouting over the guys calling him a classless jerk-off.

    Not knowing too much about the pre-helmet era, how have helmets changed hockey?

    And “It’s a private business, he can do what he wants” has nothing to do with what he *should* do.

    It’s not like the Redskins are like the local Subway franchise – it’s a civic institution (that benefits from and depends an immense amount of public funding, infrastructure and government services). To pretend it’s just Snyder’s business and no one else’s is, at best, disingenuous.

    No. Coercing others to conform to a “societal standard” is chilling.

    If the Anarchist Cookbook, Lady Chatterley’s Lover, or The Satanic Verses – all of which are banned in other countries for failing “societal standards” offend you, don’t read them. If the moniker Redskins offends you, turn the channel.

    But save us from the self-righteous crusaders.

    But no one here is trying to coerce Snyder into changing the name. I for one think it would be the worst thing ever if the name were changed because of a lawsuit or some quid pro quo for a publicly financed stadium.

    I think most people who support changing the name here want to have a dialog, for the management to see that change can do a lot of good.

    Sure, Snyder owns the team, he can do whatever he wants. But what bothers me is the level of intellectual dishonesty coming from the Redskins and the Washington Times, and people who take that intellectual dishonesty at face value.

    There was tremendous resistance to helmets in the NHL, for a really long time. There was a perception that wearing a helmet was a sign of weakness, or some European. It was that whole “Old Time Hockey” mentality.

    I love self-righteous crusaders. I don’t know if I’d want my daughter to marry one — who needs all that drama at Thanksgiving? — but I love ’em.

    Snyder does what a lot of owners do. They play the “public institution” card when they need something (like a new stadium), and when anyone objects to any of their business practices, they scream that they run a private business, and their civil liberties are being violated. You can’t have it both ways.

    I’m glad Snyder was so frank about the Redskins name. He answered the question, so move on.

    Are you sure the Austin Powers Rule of Three doesn’t apply here? Just ask him two more times and he HAS to relent.

    First auction item is Kiki Cuyler’s 1933 Cubs jersey, not a White Sox jersey. Would’ve been cool to see the Pale Hose home jersey with the baseball incorporated into the logo.

    That Cuyler jersey is one of the lesser-known designs for the Cubs; it’s pretty bland and really does look like a White Sox jersey.

    I also notice that the number on the back is plain block. In other seasons around that time, the Cubs used the McAuliffe font, and then in the late ’30s they developed the Eurostile-like font that they use to this day (though they had a straight line, Bears-style, for the number 1 at first). I wish there were a definitive history of the number fonts on the backs of jerseys. No one seems to care about them.

    Snyder’s comment reminds me of George Wallace’s 1963 Inaugural Address.

    Difference being that Wallace was an elected government official, and Snyder is the owner of a private business.

    Totally true. There’s no legal imperative for Snyder to change his team’s name, nor has anyone claimed that there is (although there may be a legal reason for him to lose his trademark protection — we’ll see).

    But I don’t think that’s the point Phil was making. At the risk of putting words in his mouth, I think his point is that Snyder and Wallace were both angry, defiant men who will, in the end, be seen as having been on the wrong side of history.

    Exactly — my implication was that “Segregation now etc” and “NEVER” will both be comments that those who uttered them will live to regret.

    Was not comparing Wallace the elected official to Snyder the private business owner.

    “…then meeting Phil at Shea for tonight’s Mets/Bucs game”

    let me know how that goes for ya! i think tailgating in lot d is about as close as youll get to “shea stadium.” since, yknow, it ceased to exist.


    I’m intrigued that you “never get tired of” a jersey sporting Indian iconography for a team named after Indians.

    You have taken a consistent, principled stand against using Indian names or references for sports teams. One only has to read the first ticker item today to see that. So how can you never tire of seeing such jersey?

    I know that you have included links to a catalog for KKK costumes and a Nazi style guide. But that was more “Lookee here at this interesting historical document and what it says about the KKK/Nazis.” Would you say that you “never tire” of seeing Klan uniforms?

    Just wondering.


    Good point! What I love about the Braves uniforms are their diagonal stripes. But I frankly hadn’t thought much about that team’s use of Native American iconography, mainly because the team doesn’t exist anymore. But that’s no excuse. Bad form on my part. Thanks for calling me on it.

    I’m fairly certain Paul is referencing the overall styling of the uniform. Take the Braves’ “B” logo off of it – the only part of the uniform that gives any hint of the team’s nickname – and it’s still a visually interesting look.

    Nevertheless, I also love the bejeezus out of the Buffalo Braves. There’s a place in my heart for all extinct teams.

    That uniform seems to be the one identified with the Braves, but for people who were fans of the team, the Columbia blue, black and white jerseys of their last few years is the uniform they most remember.

    That was a very good team. Ernie D. McAdoo. Jack “The Mad Bomber” Marin. Garfied Heard. Randy Smith. Gee, I feel so old.

    The girl who wore the Sens jersey to school in Montreal was brought to Ottawa for Game 4 as a guest of the Senators. Nice move by the owner – Hockey Night in Canada made a point to give her a nod in their broadcast.

    didn’t read the article. with that said, it would seem as if that was a really great opportunity to “teach” young people a bit of sportsmanship, and the fact that pro sports is JUST entertainment. welcome people to root for whatever team they’d like to root for, and go along with the fun. otherwise you have stadium environments like the dodger’s & giant’s, where people actually get physically hurt… or, hey… send the jerk home and get back to the breakroom for more important things like gossip and cake

    Those lacrosse helmets look great. It makes me sad though that the football teams for those schools can’t make as good looking of a helmet…I’m thinking mostly about the Maryland one.

    I only wish there was one for Towson University. Fingers crossed that the Tigers and Terrapins both win their first round matches. My head would explode from happiness seeing Towson against UMd.

    Small correction. That was the first FA Cup final at Wembley. The first final was played in 1872

    Curious as to why we’re being asked to ease up on Ticker submissions on a Friday (when the next Ticker normally isn’t until Monday)… unless there’s something going on this weekend that either I’ve missed being mentioned, or hasn’t been mentioned?

    I think many Bills fans could live with them being stuck in the 90’s. They were pretty decent that decade

    What’s most amusing about that war room pic is the use of the Bills logo next to the Houston Texans name. Apparently, they haven’t updated their logos since before the Texans’ inaugural year.

    Paul, love the site and a huge REDSKINS fan. Personally I’m satisfied that Snyder took some sort of definitive stance, and he just saved me some $$$ so I won’t have to buy new team gear. However I would cheer for the team no matter what the name was. But I find it interesting that everyone is piling on the Redskins (because the name) yet the Chief Wahoo has to be just as offensive to those who consider themselves “offended” (personally I like Chief Wahoo but whatever).

    Can you please give us some examples of people who campaign against the name and yet support the logo?

    Becuase if not, what you find “interesting” might reveal more about personal ignorance than the actual positions of other people.

    What I’m saying is, “becuase” :) if you are offended by the Redskins name then Chief Wahoo should also offend you. Yet there seems to be little activism over a logo and I see it being used all the time on TV. I could care less if you want to try throw a stone and attempt to call me ignorant. My stance is based on the fact that people are upset about the name (and they are allowed to have a right to be), yet I turn on ESPN and there’s the smiling native American Chief Wahoo prominently being used when they report on Cleveland Indians news.

    Topicality – the Redskins have been pretty aggressive in their defense of their name recently. It makes sense to talk about it.

    Also, the Indians have been toning down the Chief Wahoo imagery recently (i.e. the “C” on the helmet).

    @terriblehuman – I agree, I thought they were using the stylized “I” as well. I was just surprised to see it being used in the media as much.

    Again not trying to judge anyone’s opinion (as you can like or hate the name), I just thought it was interesting how much attention the name has been getting, yet a logo that may not be the most PC version of a native American seems to be flying under the radar. It also may be that Washington’s own local government is attempting to offer suggestions to rename the team (although if it were to happen, please not the “Redtails”)


    The *proposed* resolution is way overblown. It’s not the DC government suggesting a name change – it’s one councilman thinking about putting out a resolution.

    And the defensive campaign started in February – the resolution was in response to the “controversy”, as it were, not the other way around:

    I think the reason Chief Wahoo seems to fly under the radar is that most reasonable people agree that it’s kind of an awful caricature, and the Indians seem to be making it go away quietly without pissing off its fan base.

    There are, on the other hand, more reasonable voices defending the Redskins, so there’s an actual debate to be had (not to mention that you can stop using the Chief Wahoo logo, but it’s hard to talk about the team without saying “Redskins”).

    @terriblehuman (I’d reply but doesn’t seem I can) haha… yeah I’m not going to defend Dan Snyder or his “actions” at times. Even as a fan of the team the ownership isn’t really held in that high of regard for many of the things he has tried to do with the team, let alone his shenanigans around the DC area. And honestly as a fan, I’m in the “no preference what the name is, I’m going to cheer for the Washington Football Club” group. So if the name changes, OK by me, if the name stays the same, I’m not going to stop going to games or get on a soap box about it. Where I was going was the original federal trademark suit was aimed at the Redskins name. Yet the Braves still have trademark rights over that logo for the batting practice caps, and the Indians still have rights over Chief Wahoo (which if ESPN is using, does Cleveland give them consent to use as apart of their style guide?) I was just curious why the original federal trademark lawsuit was aimed at the team name, and why not go after all names, imagery, etc? Realizing it may be separate litigation, but I’m of the opinion, if one is offensive, shouldn’t all be (similar to how the NCAA just blanketed the changes)?

    Again I don’t have the opinion of one way or another, if the team name offends, fine change it, I’ll go get another jersey, but let’s do a universal ruling for all teams and ask all media outlets to stop using.

    Also you could probably get away with calling them “Washington” universally, in college athletics how often do you see games referred to as “Crimson Tide” vs “Buckeyes”. They are almost universally called by college or location name, not by mascot.

    What I’m saying is, “becuase” :) if you are offended by the Redskins name then Chief Wahoo should also offend you. Yet there seems to be little activism over a logo and I see it being used all the time on TV.

    Just because you don’t see the activism doesn’t mean it isn’t out there. In fact, less than one month ago Indians president Mark Shapiro had to make essentially the same statement that Snyder did. Because the same controversy exists with Wahoo.

    So again, if it is your assertion that there are people who are opposed to the Redskins name but support the Indians continuing to use Wahoo, then list them. Otherwise…

    Love those fantasy soccer league logos, especially Southie. I wish he’d done one for Foggy Bottom or Adams Morgan.

    There is a lot of activism surrounding the Chief Wahoo mark, but you’re right about it not being in the public eye the way the Redskins have for the past few months.

    The Indians are doing a good job of flying below the radar and seem to be slowly phasing out Chief Wahoo without drawing a lot of attention.

    Washington is doubling down on the stupid by claiming that “Redskins” somehow isn’t a racial slur, by posting that idiotic interview the other day, and by generally being belligerent about the whole thing.

    Not sure I would go as far to say “good job phasing out” when the high chief is on the sleeve of the jersey, team caps, website and you’re selling t-shirts like these:

    I do agree they have incorporated a number of other logos including like terriblehuman mentioned the “C” and the cursive “I”.

    Honestly if I was Dan Snyder I would totally rename the team, imagine the merch sales you’d make from new unis (especially because I believe the team is due for a makeover). And my original question wasn’t around team response but around if “Redskins” was deemed offensive, why aren’t other logos being targeted in similar lawsuits, apologies as I didn’t do a good enough job calling that out.

    I said they’re doing a good job of flying below the radar with a gradual phaseout. By drawing as little attention to it as possible.

    IIRC, the Redskins are currently/consistently(?)in the top 5 of NFL team merchandice sales; I’m not sure if the NFL revenue sharing agreement includes retail jersey, hat, and foam finger sales, but if they do every franchise benefits from the Redskins’ name, logo and look.
    Why would Snyder make an wholly unnecessary and risky change to appease the wants/feelings of those who are not Redskins supporters (and will most likely never be fans of his team no matter what they wound up being called or where they play their games)…one that could negatively impact not just his bottom line but that of the other teams…when the current branding is a proven winner with even the most casual of fans? Why “imagine” what might be when you already know you’ve got so much interest in what’s out there now and a practically guaranteed income stream to boot?

    Not arguing the political correctness of “red skins”, was questioning moreso how other logos aren’t under the same scrutiny. Washington also doesn’t have a beating drum in the stands with the exception of what is in the marching band, nor do fans participate in the “Tomahawk Chop” (because those are actions all native American’s must do if those teams fans are doing it, and in Atlanta encouraging the fans to do).

    I was simply trying to say, if you think “Redskins” is offensive you can’t look the other way at all the other things going on. Paul fairly did question the “intelligence” of Atlanta with that BP cap which is also why I am not questioning his attack on Snyder, I was posing a rhetorical of why it seems the only current federal trademark lawsuit is against one team name, of which a majority of the fanbase is truly milquetoast about the name anyways. Washington fans care more about the status of RG III’s knee right now than the name on the front of the jersey. We all have felt Paul’s way about Snyder way before he started speaking in ALL CAPS about team names.

    I was posing a rhetorical of why it seems the only current federal trademark lawsuit is against one team name

    Ah, now you’re on to something interesting.

    The reason that Snyder has to deal with a lawsuit is that federal trademark law does not protect anything “disparaging, scandalous contemptuous, or disreputable,” among others. “Redskins” has a long history as a racial slur, which makes them vulnerable in a way that others aren’t.

    Personally, I see Wahoo as being the visual equivalent of “Redskins”; indefensibly racist. But there’s apparently enough gray area there to make legal action against that team harder, where Snyder is much more exposed.

    I’m not arguing that the nickname Indians isn’t offensive or that Indians or Braves or Warriors shouldn’t also move on. I think they should.

    My point is just on the Indians PR strategy, which has been effective at keeping the controversy that the Redskins are dealing with away.

    It could be tactical. I don’t have any data about this, but I wouldn’t be surprised if there are more Washingtonians with misgivings about the “Redskins” nickname than there are Clevelanders with misgivings about Chief Wahoo. D.C. has a lot of transients whose affection for the ‘Skins might not be as ingrained or generational. And on the socioeconomic front, my guess is Washington has a greater proportion of bien-pensant types who are temperamentally more inclined to be bothered about issues of this sort (I’m trying to phrase that neutrally and non-tendentiously; please forgive me if it falls short).

    If all that’s so, it would make sense that activists are making more noise in the market where there’s a more realistic chance of success.

    “bien-pensant types who are temperamentally more inclined to be bothered about issues of this sort” would be a great indie rock band name.

    I picture their singer as a skeletal young lad who performs while attached to an iron-supplement drip.

    “…waitresses at Jerry Remy’s restaurant, across from Fenway Park, are wearing Red Sox-style two-in-ones.”

    Viva Generalissimo Madrevilker’s Contra Revolucion!

    Am I the only one who finds the Marge Simpson “memorial” patch idea/joke pretty offensive? There is no reason that Matt Groening’s mother deserves a memorial patch on a Portland sports team’s uniform (no offense to her or her family, of course), so using her death as a convenient way to joke about having Marge Simpson on a jersey seems pretty messed up to me.

    I think i read an article saying the Groenings were season ticket holders.

    So, i wouldnt recommend a patch, but a small tribute by the team would not be so bad.

    I just looked it up and Oglethorpe College’s colors are Black and Gold. How about one of you colorizers out there doing this photo.

    BTW-Doesn’t the guy at the far right in the back row look like a young Rudy Guiliani?

    As an Oglethorpe alum, it’s always nice to see the Stormy Petrels featured. While I was there, our colors were old gold and black. Quick quiz: What baseball Hall of Famer was once the 2nd baseman for Oglethorpe College?

    Anybody notice that the 1947 Dodgers pin in the lede bears a striking resemblance to the Yankees, bat/hat logo which also appeared in 1947?

    a) Pure coincidence?
    b) Yankees yet again appropriating someone else’s design?
    c) Dodgers taking a shot at their AL rivals?

    I’m not 100% on board with the Redskins’ nickname, but let’s be fair. Because Snyder’s said something about the chatter surrounding this issue, he’s “running scared.” But contra Paul, if Snyder were to “just carry on and ignore the whole thing,” one could (and maybe would) characterize that as “whistling past the graveyard,” or of being silent for some other reason that’s discreditable and/or tactically convenient to the anti-“Redskins” cause.

    No, Snyder’s forceful expression really is a demonstration of weakness. Here in Washington we know that Snyder is one of history’s all-time assholes, non-dictator division. The man does reprehensible stuff, and gets called out on it, all the time. For example, when it’s pointed out that he has made a practice of suing elderly people who cancel season-ticket pledges into penury, Snyder doesn’t take to the air and announce “I will NEVER stop suing doddering grandparents into the poorhouse, and you can print that in all caps.” Rather, Snyder refuses to talk about it at all, and instead he sends flunkies of one sort or another to speak for him on very limited technical issues. Or, mostly, to refuse to talk at all – “improper to comment on ongoing litigation,” or “respecting the privacy of all involved” or whatnot.

    However, Snyder does have a history of turning up the volume and tenor of his public comments to 11 when he’s backed into a substantive corner and facing the real chance of losing. He’s lost a couple of investor/partner rebellions over the years, and when he’s on the ropes, he tries to bluff and bluster when he’s running out of real options.

    So for Snyder to engage in public at all is a sign that he’s not entirely assured that the controversy will blow over. To make his statement in such strong terms really is a sign that he’s actually worried. Also, rhetorically posing as a populist defender of the status quo now also lets him frame any future change as a begrudged imposition from outsiders, and if you cherish the Redskins name don’t blame Snyder for the fact that your team has become the Warriors and you think it stinks.

    As Michael Scherer, a Washington reporter fro TIME tweeted today, there’s a little bit of intellectual dishonesty going on where:

    @michaelscherer: The mind of Dan Snyder: Doesn’t think “Redskins” is offensive, but draw devil horns on his picture, you are an antisemite

    So, the Tampa Bay Rays are holding another Star Trek night at the Trop. Of course, this one has a relevant tie-in, with the release next week of the new movie.

    My uni dorkness definitely started with the Star Trek franchise, so I’m curious to see what fans come out in this year. My personal favorite of all the Starfleet uniforms remains the “Monster Maroons”, the red jackets first worn in The Wrath of Khan.

    Forgot that last year’s event would’ve been tied in to the debute of the release of the HD remastering of The Next Generation‘s first season on Blu-Ray.

    I agree with you on the Wrath of Khan era uniforms. They were the best. Though TNG seasons 3-7 are a pretty close runner-up (particularly the grey version with the jacket that only Picard wore).

    Worst: the first movie, hands down.

    I went to an event last year with lots of costumes – I’d say it was an even split between new movie and TNG.

    I think your opinion of Snyders remarks are, well, frankly silly. At this point the whole thing is more than an annoyance than anything else. We’re no where closer to the end of Redskins than we were a decade ago. Suggesting that his comments mean what you think is more self fulfillment than reality.

    The bottom line is that this is largely a non-issue.

    The bottom line is that this is largely a non-issue.

    I see.

    Please tell me, was it a “non-issue” to the National Museum of the American Indian, which held a symposium on the topic earlier this year? Is it a “non-issue” to the eight or nine Washington Post writers who’ve urged the team to change its name? Is it a “non-issue” to the several media outlets that have stopped referring to the team by its given name? Is it a “non-issue” to the literally thousands of people who’ve posted comments to my articles on this subject? Is it a “non-issue” to the literally hundreds of schools that have stopped using Native American mascots over the past four decades?

    Or is it simply a “non-issue” to you, because you wish it would go away?

    Just askin’.

    This isn’t a “non-issue” but I do generally feel that the Native American images for mascots argument has gotten out of control, and it is not as big of an issue as some make it out to be.

    For me personally, I could care more. I can see both sides of the argument, but the facts state that the majority of the people do not mind Native Americans being used as mascots. In my opinion, if Native American images were to ever be banned for use in sports, it sets an awfully dangerous precedent. Everyone and their cousin will come out of the woodwork and say some mascot offends them, and would like it banned too. Sooner or later some animal activists will say that the University of Santa Cruz can no longer use Banana Slugs as their mascot because of the scarcity of the slugs in California. Who knows. It would just open up a large can of worms in my opinion, and I don’t think it is worth opening.

    Apparently it’s a non-issue to the numerous leaders of people that you hope soooo badly that it offends, Paul. How many Native American representatives have responded with a collective “meh” when asked??? Do some research and I’m sure you’ll figure out that the people’s who opinion truly matter on this issue simply don’t care. Pushing your personal dogma accomplishes little more than to asuage those of us who could give a shit, begging us to side with ANYbody else who disagrees with your personal agenda. Well done, you communist loving, self-righteous, wanna-be hipster tool.

    You seem like a thoughtful, well adjusted person just bursting with empathy.

    Dan Snyder sick of people asking about the Redskins name . . probably

    Dany Snyder “running scared” . . . unlikely.

    Sooner or later some animal activists will say that the University of Santa Cruz can no longer use Banana Slugs as their mascot because of the scarcity of the slugs in California.

    So, Native Americans = banana slugs. Got it.

    And the next logical step after legalization of gay marriage is legalization of human/animal marriage, right?

    Mets v Buccos, top of the second – ballboy snares a foul pop. The SNY announcers note that he has a cap under his helmet – “He has a Juan Pierre thing going on”.

    I believe you are a little misguided in classifying the highest paid public employee in most states being a coach as “disgraceful”. None of these coaches are paid with state or school funds, they are paid by the athletic department with money generated from ticket sales, apparel sales, advertising, etc. In some cases the athletic department gives money to the school.

    That’s completely inaccurate. First, it’s a myth that sports, including football, make money. Most programs actually operate in the red. Second, the salary is compounded by endorsement side deals, in which coaches augment their base salary by whoring out their teams to sneaker companies.

    Did anybody notice the irony that a blog so myopically fixated on keeping ALL uniforms as they were in the 80’s, condiscendingly singles out the Buffalo Bills for being “stuck” in the 90’s???

    This site is a great site for uniform enthusiasts. The best. The sad thing is the social agenda that is constantly being rammed down the throats of the people that enjoy the site for what it is. A great uniform site. Leave the political views in your back pocket and the site would be much more enjoyable.

    I agree, Randy. Absolutely love the site, but the fairly constant debate over the whole Native American “issue” is grating. I’d rather Paul go into another rant about how American sports are too good for jersey sponsorship than have to read him make a bigger issue out of the Native American thing than it should be. The large majority of people either have no problem with or don’t care enough about these “racist” names in sports. 95% of a time, it’s a white person complaining about this crap. The people being “offended” are more tolerant than people that these names aren’t referencing. Try as hard as you may, but the Cleveland Indians isn’t the same as calling a team the Cleveland N***ers. It is no more offensive than any other sports name that references a group of humans. Redskins is the only name you have a legitimate argument for and the history, large wallets, and fan support of that team will keep them from having to change their name.

Comments are closed.