Before we dive into today’s lengthy content, just want to mention that I have an ESPN piece today about Wes Welker’s new helmet — look here.
Now then: I always get a kick out of niche-specific obsessions, so I’ve long been a fan of the blog Appreciation of Booted News Women, which is exactly what it sounds like — a fan site devoted to female TV newscasters wearing boots.
I’m pretty sure I’ve linked to the site in the Ticker at some point, or maybe as a Catch of the Day, but I had never communicated with the site’s webmaster or even paid attention to his name. Then, last month, I received a Ticker submission for a Uni Watch reader named Barry Brite (he had sent in something relating to high school football uniforms), and I noticed that his email address was firstname.lastname@example.org. “Hey,” I wrote back, “I dig your site. Maybe we should interview you for Uni Watch!”
So that’s what we did. While Barry’s site isn’t about sports, his obsessive focus on a particular footwear niche feels very Uni Watch, no? Here’s how our conversation went:
Uni Watch: How old are you, where do you live, and what do you do for a living?
Barry Brite: I was born in 1964, I live in the Twin Cities, and I work in I.T.
UW: Is Barry Brite your real name?
UW: What is it about booted newswomen that fascinates you so much, and when did you first realize that you were interested in them?
BB: It goes back a long ways. I mean, I was a young kid when I first noticed it.
UW: When you say “young kid,” how young were you? Like, 10, 12 years old?
BB: Yeah, right around there.
UW: Was there one booted woman who had a particularly formative effect or impact on you?
BB: Not particularly. Jane Pauley was probably an early one, but it’s not like there was one who I can single out as the one who changed my life or anything like that.
UW: Would you describe your relationship to booted newswomen as an interest, a hobby, an obsession, a fetish — all of the above?
BB: Probably all of the above. What I do want to say, as far as festishes, is that a lot of guys who are into boots are also into, like, BDSM, or maybe licking boots and stuff like that, and I’m not into that. I just enjoy seeing women wearing boots. I find them attractive; that doesn’t mean I want to have sex with all of them.
UW: Are you fascinated by other booted women, or booted men for that matter, or even boots in general, or just newswomen?
BB: Women. All women.
UW: So why have you singled out booted newswomen as the focus of your your website?
BB: Going back to when I was younger, I’d see some of the newswomen wearing boots here on local TV, and I’d think, “Well, what about Milwaukee? There must be women wearing boots on Milwaukee’s news shows, too. And what about other cities? But there was no way to see ’em. This was the ’70s, you know? But then the internet came along and changed everything.
There was this Yahoo group called Newswomen and Boots, which I posted a lot of photos on. But the Yahoo groups are kind of limited in terms of what you can do, and I figured I could do it better with my own site.
UW: So that’s how you got the idea to start the site. When was that?
BB: It actually started as a place where I just stored pictures of one particular newswoman from the Twin Cities who I was fond of, named Alix Kendall. The site itself was actually called the Alix Kendall Worship Site, or something like that. But I didn’t publicize it, I didn’t do anything with it. It was just here, I might have done a couple of posts in 2007, and maybe a couple more in ’08 and ’09. It wasn’t until December of 2010 that I really started to work at it, and that’s when I changed the site’s name.
One of the main things I try to do is send out a message that the site and I are not creepy, not stalker-ish or anything like that. Don’t want that, don’t want guys hanging around the site if they’re like that. Other sites, guys will post comments like, “Oh yeah, I want to smell her stockinged feet,” or whatever, and that’s not what my site is about.
Believe it or not, I’m almost more of a prude. I often won’t even approve a comment if it has the word “sexy,” even though that’s probably socially acceptable. I just don’t want it going there. Like, here’s a picture of these women wearing boots — enjoy that and let it end there. Maybe once or twice a year I’ll post something like “If I hear about any of you guys creepin’ on these women, I’m gonna shut the site down, ’cause it ain’t worth it if you’re doing that.”
UW: Has anything like that ever happened?
BB: No. But sometimes there’s a reader who’s just a little too active, too involved, and you just want to be careful.
UW: I am familiar with that type of reader, Barry.
BB: I can believe it!
UW: Are there other sites that compete with yours?
BB: There was this one guy who focused mostly on L.A., where he lived. And we collaborated some — I’d send him some of my photos, he’d send me some of his. He stopped doing his site, but he still sends me stuff every so often. And there’s another guy who does it Europe, I think in the Netherlands…
UW: Do you do international coverage yourself, or do you stick to the U.S.?
BB: A little bit of international. There’s so much out there, and I only have so much time. And that’s the thing — there are lots of sites where you can see photos of, say, Natalie Morales from The Today Show. She’s nationally known. But I try to show women who you might not know otherwise.
UW: Has the site changed your life in any way?
BB: I would say I’m blown away by how well-known it is, how much traffic we get. I’m blown away talking to you right now!
UW: How much traffic are we talking about?
BB: In November, we had over 500,000 visits. Now, is that one guy visiting 500,000 times? Could be!
UW: Probably more like five guys each visiting 100,000 times.
BB: And that would be fine by me.
UW: How do you get your content? Like, do readers send screen shots or videos to you, or do you scour the web, or what?
BB: It’s mostly me scouring the web, but I do have a lot of collaborators. I also get a lot of stuff off of Facebook and Twitter, where the gals will often post their outfit of the day.
UW: Oh, just like a college football team will say, “This is the uniform we’re wearing this week.”
UW: How often do you post new content to the site?
BB [laughing]: This time of year, I probably have between 20 and 35 new posts a day.
UW [incredulously]: A day?!
UW: And when you say, “this time of year,” that’s because women are more likely to wear boots in the winter?
BB: Right. It’s definitely a seasonal thing. I’m in Minnesota, so it’s boot season for about nine months of the year.
UW: When did newswomen start wearing boots, anyway? Do you know anything about that history?
BB: You know, I honestly don’t know. But I assume it happened when boots got more popular and when women became more involved in TV broadcasts. It was a pretty male-dominated field until the ’70s, so I’m guessing that’s when the boots started.
UW: Was there ever a golden age of booted newswomen? Are we in that golden age right now?
BB: I think we’re living in it right now, Paul. The reason I said that is because of the great variety we’ve seen the past few years. For a number of years the only boots you would see were black leather knee-highs. While those are and always will be classic, in the past three years it’s been more socially acceptable to wear over-the-knee boots. And I really want to point out that there is a huge difference between over-the-knee and what Julia Roberts wore in Pretty Woman. Those were thigh-high boots and obviously are associated with hookers. Over-the-knees cover the kneecap and end right above the knee, whereas thigh-high extend halfway between the knee and crotch.
Katie Couric was the first newswoman I know of to wear OTK on a national news program (The Today Show), in 2004 or 2005. Around 2009 to 2010, OTK became very popular for women as a whole, and newswomen followed suit.
Also, in the past few years we have seen many more colors than just black. Brown finally made a big comeback after it had been the most popular boot color from the mid-’70s to mid-’80s. We have seen many boots in red, gray, maroon, purple, tan and taupe. And white may finally be coming back as a boot color.
UW: Aside from the seasonal thing, what sorts of trends or patterns have you noticed regarding booted newswomen? Like, are boots more commonly seen in certain parts of the country, or on women of a particular race, or anything like that?
BB: Boots cross racial lines, definitely. And that’s another thing about me: I don’t care what race the woman is, I don’t care how large or small she is, I don’t care about her age, I don’t care what her face looks like — I just care about the boots. Some guys only like to see, say, blondes in their 20s. But I care about the boots.
UW: You have repeatedly referred to your readers as “these guys” or “some guys,” but what about women? Do you have female readers? Can’t women appreciate women in boots?
BB: Definitely, definitely. We have a few female readers. But I’m always wondering, “Is that really a woman, or is it a guy using a woman’s handle?”
UW: If you had your way, would all newswomen wear boots, or would that make it less special?
BB: Yes, that. It’s more of a treat this way. There are some women who wear boots almost daily, and then there are some that are almost holy grails — like, “I really want to see her wearing boots.” And once in a while those will come to fruition. That really makes it special.
UW: Do you prefer a newswoman who wears the same pair of boots night after night, or one who rotates through lots of different pairs every night, or one who only wears boots every once in a while, sort of as a nice surprise?
BB: I like to see a variety of boots. But there are some who’ll stick to the same pair. There’s the one in Cleveland, Hollie Strano, who’s cute as a button, but it’s always the same pair of black knee-highs.
UW: Are there any newswomen who are, like, superstars in the world of booted newswomen?
BB: Oh, definitely. In fact, I have a Hall of Fame on the site. I try to keep it somewhat exclusive — you know, just like the Baseball Hall of Fame.
UW: Sure, you have to maintain high standards.
BB: Yup, exactly.
UW: The women featured on your site — are most of them anchors, reporters, meteorologists, sit-down talk hosts, or what?
BB: All of those. But less so reporters, just because of the nature of the camera work — the reporters usually aren’t shown below the waist. For anchors, I love the stations where their news set doesn’t put the anchors behind a desk. Sacramento is a great example of that.
UW: So they can do a full-body shot, and that’s what you’re looking for.
UW: What about sports — is the local sports anchor ever a booted newswoman?
BB: There are some of those, yeah, like Jen Lada. And of course there are the big national names like Erin Andrews and Hannah Storm.
Oh, and you’ll like this, Paul: Sometimes the sports reporters wear football jerseys or hockey jerseys along with the boots.
UW: Oooh, that does sound good. But let’s stick with the boots — do you prefer to see them being worn with a dress, a skirt, knickers, or pants?
BB: If I had to pick one, I’d say a dress or skirt with nylons. But I like boots with pants, too. Some guys like the bare legs, but I don’t care for that as much.
UW: And as long as you can see the boots, do you prefer to see your booted newswomen sitting or standing?
BB: I prefer standing. The worst is when someone’s sitting and there are tables or plants blocking the view of the boots!
UW: Sometimes you’ll see someone walking across the set, like from one monitor to another. Do you like that, when they’re in motion, or do you prefer that they stay stationary?
BB: I like watching them in motion, but it’s harder to make a screen grab.
UW: When you see a booted newswomen, do you try to identify which brand of boot she’s wearing? Do you have favorite brands?
BB: Yeah, I try to do that, but I’m not great at it. One brand I like is Vince Camuto. They make good boots. And one thing I’ll do is in September, when the new lines of boots come out, I’ll post some of the new boot designs, so people know what to look for, what to expect.
UW: Have you ever made contact with a booted newswoman, either via email or on Twitter or whatever, and told her that you like her boots, or that you’d featured her on your site?
BB: Yes, I definitely have.
UW: And how has that gone?
BB: Oh, fantastic. I converse on Twitter with quite a few of them, actually. They say things like, “Thanks for featuring me on your site” or “Love it, love your site.” Several of them — five of them, I think — even let me interview them for the site.
I’ve also had a few newswomen call me out when I didn’t have them on the blog — “Hey, you missed me!” I’ve had some send me pictures if there was no other way for me to get them, like if they were sitting behind a desk, or if only their face was shown.
UW: Has anyone ever reacted negatively after being featured on your site?
BB: Yes. This one woman saw that I had posted about her, and she wrote about it on Facebook, saying she thought it was creepy and whatever. So I took that post down and wrote her a nice email saying, “I’m very sorry you were creeped out by this. That’s not my intention at all. I took that post down and won’t bother you again.” And she wrote back and said, “Oh, I think I overreacted — you don’t have to take it down. I was just a little stunned to see that.” But I kept that post deleted.
UW: Have there been any other situations where you had to take down a post?
BB: The day after the Newtown shootings, there were several women who don’t usually wear boots on the air, but they wore them that day. So I put some photos up, but I also wrote to my readers, “Guys, you gotta give me some guidance on what to do here. They’re covering Newtown — I kinda feel bad putting these up. What do you think?” And people said I should take ’em down, so I did.
UW: Have you met any of these newswomen in person?
UW: Would you even want to, or do you prefer to see them through the lens of the TV camera?
BB: I do not want to meet them.
UW: Not even to interview one of them?
BB: Maybe if they initiated it. My site has been mentioned on-air a few times.
UW: Wait — mentioned on-air by a booted newswoman?
BB: Yes. [You can see a few examples below ”” PL]
UW: That must be a dream come true! What an incredible validation of what you’re doing. That’s awesome!
BB: Yes, validation, that’s the word.
UW: Are you married?
UW: Were you still married when you started this project?
BB: Yes. I mean, we weren’t legally divorced yet, but we were separated.
UW: I’m sorry — I don’t mean to tread into painful territory here. But did your wife know about the website?
BB: No. She still doesn’t know. Nobody knows — my friends, family, co-workers. Nobody knows about it.
UW: You’ve mentioned to me that you have two teen-aged daughters, and part of the reason you’re secretive about the project is that you’re worried about any blowback that could affect them.
UW: Do you have any plans to grow the site into something bigger? How long do you think you’ll keep doing it?
BB: I was kinda thinking this might be the last year, but it’s probably not going to be.
UW: Why were you thinking that, and what changed your mind?
BB: Because of trends in boots, actually. I don’t like ankle boots, combat boots, granny boots…
UW: Oh, I had meant to ask that! How high does a boot have to be to qualify as a boot, at least for you?
BB: It can depend on how much content there is that day. If I already have 25 potential posts where the boots are either knee-high or over the knee, I’m not gonna bother with the ankle- or calf-high. But if it’s a slower day, I’ll include those.
UW: Is there ever a point where you’re thinking, “This is just the same thing over and over” and you’re not really getting anything new out of it? Or do you still have the same excitement for the new content?
BB: I hit ruts, definitely. But, you know, it’s what I do. It’s an obsession, obviously, but I think it’s also a service to my readers. So that keeps motivating me.
UW: Can you imagine not doing the site? Does the thought of that make your life feel a little empty?
BB: Yeah, I’d probably have to find something else to put my energy into. And I probably should!
UW: Sometimes I try to recall what my life was like before Uni Watch, and it’s hard to even remember. So a lot of the things you’ve said, on various aspects of your project, really resonate with me.
BB: Well, I have to tell you, I take pride in seeing how popular your site is, and how much attention you’ve gotten for it, because I’ve been a big fan of your site for a long time.
UW: So Uni Watch’s success makes you feel validated on some level?
BB: More like I’m just happy for you.
UW: Thank you! One last question: Do you ever wear boots yourself?
BB: No, I don’t.
And there you have it. Big thanks to Barry for sharing his story, and congrats on all his success.
Australian Open Update
By Brinke Guthrie
High temps at the AO are causing court problems with players’ shoes. Willie Tsonga’s shoes, for example, melted! The court is unforgiving when it comes to racket frames, too.
In other AO news:
• Nike has reissued one of the old Agassi shoes to commemorate AA’s success Down Under, and I don’t mind saying I’d like to own these. Wore a pair of them in the orange/powder blue and lava pink/black combos way back when.
• Spain’s Tommy Robredo has switched clothing suppliers, from Chinese brand Erke to Sergio Tacchini.
• Sam Querrey has moved from K-Swiss to Fila. (And wearing a black cap on his noggin in 100+ degree weather?) Still wearing K-Swiss shoes while Fila makes custom molds for his size 13.5 feet.
• Adidas has re-released the venerable Stan Smith shoe, and their flagship endorser Andy Murray approves. Further info about the packaging here.
• German pro Tommy Haas, who was known for wearing whatever he wanted on the court, (did I see him wearing a Target/Champion C9 T-shirt on court once?), has an actual clothing deal now, with the stylish 1980s Italian line Ellesse (pronounced “LS”).
• Asics AO stuff is here. Ugly.
ESPN reminder: In case you missed it yesterday afternoon, my latest ESPN column looks at all sorts of NOB variations — full names, first names, accents, “Jr.” and “Sr.,” and more. Enjoy (and my thanks to everyone who pointed out a few important omissions when the column went live yesterday).
Raffle reminder: I’m currently raffling off a game-used Bengals jersey. For details, look here.
QBC update: If you’ve been thinking about attending this Saturday’s Queens Baseball Convention (which will feature a Mets uniform panel discussion featuring myself, Phil, and four other uniform luminaries), here’s a bunch of additional info from event organizer Shannon Shark. See you there!
Tick-Tock: Today’s Ticker was compiled and written by Mike Chamernik.
Baseball News: In addition to designing the Charlotte Hornets’ uniforms, fashion designer Alexander Julian created the early-1990s Charlotte Knights unis, too (from Brian Mazmanian). ”¦ The Royals will be giving away camo-lettered jerseys in May ”¦ SportingNews had a 10-year-old rank the MLB mascots, and the highlight was his take on the Oriole Bird (from Matthew Edwards). ”¦ I’m a huge fan of comedian Adam Carolla, and it turns out he has a beef with pine tar on batting helmets and baseball pants. Quote from the Aceman in the piece: “In baseball half the guys are wearing stirrups above the knee and the other guys have pants dragging behind them. Do we have rules? It’s called a uniform. Get your uniform together! What’s up, baseball? Get your crap together!”
NFL News: Many people sent this in: What if NFL logos were inspired by hipsters? ”¦ Here’s what your 49ers jersey says about you. The explanation for a Kyle Williams jersey should have simply been, “I am Kenny Williams” (from Patrick O’Neill). ”¦ Niners coach Jim Harbaugh addressed his affinity for eight dollar khaki pants. He was also photographed buying Khakis at a Wal-Mart (from Brinke). ”¦ “My daughter picked up ”˜The Young Author’s Do-It-Yourself Book,’ and on this page it has what is clearly late ’80s- early ’90s John Elway,” says Marc Burgess. “I had to admire the placement of the bird and the margins to avoid any trademark issues. No idea who Celtics No. 23 is supposed to be, though.” ”¦ Jeff Flynn found a Daryle Lamonica Raiders helmet that was recently sold on eBay. “Check out the little Raiders shield on the front of the helmet!” he says. ”¦ John Alexander sends along some bizarre uniform concepts. ”¦ President George H. W. Bush has a pair of Texans socks. The man has an A-plus sock wardrobe (from Robert Silverman). ”¦ This Peyton Manning Omaha endorsement thing went from internet joke to potential reality in just three days. “No. Just”¦ no,” says Bobby Pinkham. “Just the fact that they asked consultants and took the time to crunch the monetary numbers, the fact that they took it so seriously really just makes me lose all faith in humanity.”
Hockey News: Talk about burying the lead (for us at least): Check out item No. 30 of this article from last week, where it says that Adidas is considering putting its own name on uniforms, replacing the Reebok wordmark. ”¦ Switzerland is experimenting with transparent boards (from Phil). ”¦ From yesterday’s comments: The Islanders will wear their stadium series jerseys for a few home games this season. ”¦ Brett Hull wore baseball glove-styled hockey gloves in the 1996 All-Star Game (from Tim Donovan). ”¦ Russian president Vladimir Putin doesn’t quite know how to put on a hockey helmet. ”¦ Not only does Flyers’ goalie Ron Hextall have his jersey ripped off in this 1989 video clip, but it turns out he’s another goalie who wears a glove under his catcher (from Tony Kellogg).
NBA News: Creative services firm Sid Lee will handle the Toronto Raptors’ redesign (from Phil). ”¦ A South Florida school counselor shaved off a Miami Heat logo that was in a student’s haircut, reportedly because he thought the logo was “gang-related.” ”¦ The Trail Blazers are giving away some really cool player caricature drinking glasses. ”¦ The Evanston (IL) High School Wildkits have this as a logo, but for basketball they’ve borrowed the Charlotte Bobcats’ look.
College Hoops News: Kansas is planning multi-colored T-shirt cheering sections for Saturday’s game against Oklahoma State (from Kyle Romine). ”¦ Also from KU, the team will keep their new alternate uniforms through the rest of the season (from Alan Bloomquist). ”¦ Ohio has a new home white uniform (from Johnny Bruno). … Virginia Tech went GFGS with TNOB last night (from Andrew Cosentino).
Grab Bag: An Alabama player has Crimson Tide spinners on his car, which would be cool if it was 2003. … Sanfrecce Hiroshima has new uniforms (from Trevor Williams). ”¦ Commenter Rydell sends in this logo-related tale: “I received a memo from my bank stating ”˜The cardholder name embossed on your credit card must be a maximum of 20 characters (shortened from current 25 characters). This is an industry standard which prevents names from overlapping the logos that appear on the cards.’ Sorrrrry.” ”¦ A news report on a Minnesota outdoor ice rink contains some excellent old sports photos (from Barry Brite). ”¦ Here’s a roundup of the top-selling jerseys from each major sport in 2013 (from Phil). ”¦ Also from Phil, Nike is doing just fine economically. ”¦ John Daly wore some pretty loud pants at the Sony Open (from Matt Mitchell). ”¦ Olympic curlers are putting an emphasis on getting in shape (from Tommy Turner). ”¦ “Cool overview of 2014 team kit for pro cycling,” says Sean Clancy, “and a plea to do away with having to pin numbers on jerseys.” ”¦ Black & Decker, I mean, Black + Decker, has a new image. ”¦ University of Nebraska Kearney is now an Under Armour school, as submitted by Mike Vamosi, Jason Johnson and Joseph Andersen, all UNK alumni. They all have to know each other, right?
“Boston Strong” plates probably coming soon… link
Time to start a real uni site with my company.. Details to follow…cannot take this metrosexual yuppie site any longer
I wish you people could make up your mind about whether I’m a yuppie, a hipster, a commie, or any of the other things you call me. It gets confusing.
“Yuppie.” Ha! Haven’t heard that word in a while. What is this, 1983? Seems that the word is so old and out of use that people don’t know that it’s actually an initialism. Paul is neither Y nor P. (Says a guy who’s not U, and a couple of months from not being able to claim Y either.)
No ‘Skins watch today, wonder what put him over the edge? Must’ve been the Aussie Open coverage, yuppies LOVE tennis.
No, yuppies play tennis. They love racquetball.
Not so. True yuppies recognize racquetball as the proletarian, aspirational gateway to the true sport of squash. In keeping with today’s Ticker, played these days on a transparent court.
I must be seeing double, 4 Scotts!
Yuppie! Well, that was me. My old VW Beetle had a fairly large green croc decal on the HOOD over a rust spot. Looked great, too.
I find your ideas intriguing, and I wish to subscribe to your newsletter.
Least surprising comment of the day!
I have it as a keyboard shortcut on my phone!
A site about link, you say? Count me in! Keep me updated please!
Longest…. interview…. ever.
Add dumbest to your description.
Oh yeah, well the jerk store called and said YOU should add even MORE dumbest to your description!
(put that in your hat and smoke it)
;^) <- winky face
Not even close to the longest interview to have appeared on this site.
No photos of melting shoes??? Lame (not Uni-watch. That article)
looked for ’em, can’t locate. but on the flip side, the extreme heat even caused Canadian Frank Dancevic to hallucinate about Snoopy of all things and later caused him to collapse.
It’s just way too hot there- can’t they move the AO to April or October or something?
The same thing might happen with the 2020 Tokyo Olympic Games. July and August are pure hell — 95Â°F, 95% humidity every day — and last time Tokyo got the games they were held in the sensible month of October. Nowadays the television stations rule over all, and we might well have athletes keeling over with heat exhaustion.
I think they’ve discussed moving it but the resistance is that moving one Slam causes a ripple effect to the entire calendar. Not that it would be impossible, it’s just not something they want to undertake. Moving it to April would bump it up against the French Open, which is in May. Moving it to October would put it too close on the heels of the US Open, which is in September.
Alexander Julian also designed the stadium seating at Knights Stadium. Doesn’t look like the team or city let him anywhere near the new downtown Charlotte ballpark, though, as all the seats appear to be green.
Alexander Julian also designed the multi-colored seating at Knights Stadium. The team or city doesn’t appear to have brought him back to design the seating at the new stadium, though.
Not really sure where studying boots on women who are on tv is related to athletics, but uh okay. Skipped the interview, which took a while to scroll past. Just seemed to be a topic way off base with the norm around here.
Not really sure where studying boots on women who are on tv is related to athletics…
It’s not. But it’s sort of uni-related and, like many things that we occasionally delve into here (twist-ties vs. bread clips, pizza box lid supports, etc.), it’s feels obsessive enough to qualify as an interesting tangent.
I realize not everyone will care, and that’s fine — you scroll past it and move on.
I read the first few paragraphs and then scrolled on… I was more interested to see the complaints or unfortunate insults lobbed at Paul. As a blogger in a niche area, I can relate to the idea that this is Paul’s site and he can (and should) blog about whatever the hell he wants (dinner, what he did last night, etc.). Nobody is obligated to read it. It’s funny to me that people would complain about what a guy posts on a free website that nobody is paying for. It’s not quite as funny (or as extreme) as the trolling, but scroll on, move on…
I read the first few paragraphs and then scrolled on… I was more interested to see the complaints or unfortunate insults lobbed at Paul. As a blogger, I can relate to the idea that this is Paul’s site and he can (and should) blog about whatever the hell he wants (dinner, what he did last night, etc.). Nobody is obligated to read it. It’s funny to me that people would complain about what a guy posts on a free website that nobody is paying for. It’s not quite as funny (or as extreme) as the trolling, but scroll on, move on…
And I did scroll past it. No harm, no foul, just a topic I didn’t expect to see around here. I do applaud your effort to expand topics and ideas around here, just not one up my alley today. Keep it up.
I read the first few paragraphs and then scrolled on… I was more interested to see the complaints or unfortunate insults lobbed at Paul. As a blogger, I can relate to the idea that this is Paul’s site and he can (and should) blog about whatever the hell he wants (dinner, what he did last night, etc.). Nobody is obligated to read it. It’s funny to me that people would complain about what a guy posts on a free website that nobody is paying for. It’s not quite as funny (or as extreme) as the trolling, but scroll on, move on…
This bugs me every time I see an old Raiders helmet…. look at the logo on the side – the helmet on the logo is depicted with white glare on it. But if you go to a site like sportslogos.net, you’ll see the Raiders logo being listed as unchanged since 1964. So… why does this version with the glare not seem to show up anywhere, and when did the team stop using it?
That is an AWESOME observation. Not being a Raiders guy I never looked that closely. Very cool. I look forward to hearing some answers.
The new Black & Decker (I’m still calling it Black ampersand Decker) logo is almost unreadable it is so bad!
It looks like an overseas knock-off.
Agreed — looks like a generic/budget brand.
I like swapping out the ampersand for the plus sign. But the rest is a disaster.
The new styling looks like something that would’ve been done in the 1970s. As for switching to the plus sign, that just reminds me of Gulf+Western.
Exactly my thought. The new logo isn’t a disaster – I mean, it’s a huge downgrade to me, but I can’t make a case for it being actually bad – but the new packaging made me think of the late 1970s and early 1980s. What is the new image Black and/or Decker is going for? The makers of objects that just sit, inert, in the dark? Showing the tool in use is a packaging cliche, yes, but it’s one of those things that’s a cliche because it’s true.
Don’t mind the packaging, it’ll be distinct on the shelf. The wordmark on the other hand is a downgrade. The old font screamed “workmanlike” to me. This one scream “generic.”
Black + Decker…
isn’t that an old cop movie with Tom Hanks?
That was “Tenspeed + Brown Shoe”.
Lippincott says it aimed for the brand to feel ‘fundamentally human, to reflect Black + Decker’s ability to transform a daunting task into a feeling of accomplishment.’…It also wanted to create a brand that was ‘versatile enough to shape a cohesive end-to-end customer journey’.
I’m a smart guy, I have absolutely no idea what that means or how any of it relates to the logo change.
I get what this might mean, but the logo and packaging communicate something very near the opposite of any of that fluff. Home Depot’s “More Saving, More Doing” campaign is the acme of “transforming a daunting task into a feeling of accomplishment.” Heck, Black and/or Decker’s outgoing packaging achieved that to an extent. Showing people using the tool to complete a task comes close to the “cohesive end-to-end customer journey” they have in mind.
A black box with a tight macro shot of the tool at rest in dark empty space does none of that. I mean, have they ever seen the tool section of a hardware store? Right above or beside all the boxes, there will be the actual tool itself, the physical object, sitting on a shelf for you to see and handle. The box doesn’t need to illustrate what the tool looks like, it needs to illustrate what the tool does and how it will help you achieve your task.
Not sure if this had been posted before: NFL logos redesigned as hipsters…
Someone didn’t read today’s Ticker very carefully.
The Packers cheesehead-seat bicycle made my week. The only guy I personally know whom I would call a “hipster” in the pejorative sense is a Packers fan whose two passions in life are the awesomeness of Milwaukee and the awesomeness of bicycling. I had to share that logo with everyone I know who also knows the guy.
whose two passions in life are the awesomeness of Milwaukee and the awesomeness of bicycling.
Sounds a bit like Paul, actually.
Heh, if John Daly grew muttonchops he’d just about be a doppelganger for Charlie Rich.
That clip of Gulbis destroying his racket is a fine advertisement for the maxim “a good carpenter doesn’t blame his tools.” It’s impossible to hit a shoulder-high forehand volley with a semi-Western grip and keep it from sailing over the baseline. Science!
Sportingnews said that little kid ranked every MLB mascot but he/they missed Sluggerrr from the Royals. Who, for the record, rocks stirrups.
Sooooo no one reads the ticker anymore?
Barry, if you’ve never been to Japan before, you need to come out here. Many, if not most, women wear boots like this every single day in the winter.
Thank You, I hope to do that some day!
Idiocracy is upon us.
“I’m the secretary of state. Brought to you by Carl’s Jr.”
“Why do you keep saying that?”
“Cause they pay me every time I do.”
My first instinct is to shoot Darren Rovell, but then I realized, we need to keep him and his Twitter account around so that we have a constant reminder of the potential excesses of commercialization in sports.
When we think we can’t go any lower, Rovell will show us an even deeper cesspool.
That does seem to be the niche he’s cornered.
I’d like to see him switch it up, just to sabotage Rovell’s brand of cynicism, and go with “Utah!” for a while. Then maybe “Juno!” or “Tarawa!” or “Inchon!”
Didn’t the old St. Paul Civic Center (home of the WHA’s Minnesota Fighting Saints) have transparent boards in the 1970s?
YES it did!
I don’t know why anyone would want transparent boards — a solid white background is ideal for seeing the puck, which is what matters most. I’m surprised that the NHLPA allowed so many teams to fill their boards with advertising that might make the puck harder to see.
As a goalie I wonder the same thing. I’d hate to have to try finding the puck in front of clear boards.
On the topic of golf or batting gloves under catchers, I’m not sure if anyone has mentioned it but as recently as the the 80s and 90s, catchers didn’t have a lot of protection in the palm. You always try to catch the puck in the trap but it doesn’t always work out that way, and back then it’d sting like crazy I’d you caught it flush on the palm. When I started playing in the mid-80s I wore a batting glove. Later on, when catchers got better protection in the palm I no longer really needed the batting glove, and besides the batting glove would get stiff after a season or so. However I was used to wearing a glove inside so I switched to the thin glove liners that outdoor places like REI sell. I actually wear one on my stick hand also. They keep my hands warm and they stop my goalie gloves from absorbing so much sweat. Since I buy my own gear, I’m interested in making it last as long as possible. There’s probably a little goalie superstition in the mix also.
I’ve always wanted to be able to use the phrase “As a goalie…” in conversation. Also, “As a guitarist…” and “As an expert in classical languages…” I admire those of you who can preface a comment with “As an…” We who lack any specialized expertise salute you.
“As a generalist …”
Or, if you have any European ancestry to speak of, it’s likely a true statement to say:
“As a distant heir to the Carolingian throne …”
Or, if you have any European, Asian, or Middle Eastern ancestry,
“As a descendant of Genghis Khan …”
I’ve been away awhile. arrScott, I’ve missed ye.
One of the rinks where I play has transparent boards at the benches. I was told it was because they play sledge hockey on that rink and they make so the players can see the game when they are on the bench.
I came here to say this. They had it for many years at the Civic Center after the Fighting Saints folded. I’m sure there’s plenty of high school hockey tournament footage out there from the 70’s and 80’s with the clear boards. Not sure when or why they eventually went to white.
Also on a side note, is the Fighting Saints logo not one of the best ever?
the phillie phanatic wears stirrups too cameron!!
That Royals jersey looks like it has a “woodland” camo wordmark instead of last year’s digital camo and since the giveaway is scheduled for Memorial Day, can we assume that MLB teams will be sporting woodland camo to honor America this season?
Probably a safe assumption. Since American troops no longer wear woodland camo, is baseball using Memorial Day this year to honor the fallen troops of our enemies in Afghanistan, many of whom do wear woodland camo? Or is it that this year, MLB is only honoring those who died in Vietnam, Operation Urgent Fury, and Operating Just Cause?
I don’t have a foot or stocking fetish, but I have to stop doing whatever I am doing whenever Maria Stephanos comes on TV.(The Fox 25 newswoman in red)
In regards to marketing “Omaha”
In the words of the immortal Bill Hicks, “If you’re in marketing, kill yourself…quit putting a…dollar sign on…everything”
Agreed. I’m usually pretty interested in Paul’s tangential topics. Even if I’m not drawn to the topic itself, I love reading about other peoples’ interests, what makes people tick. I’m also always amazed at the degree of complexity that is often revealed in a seemingly simple topic once you start to get the perspective of an insider.
All that being said, I could never move beyond the creep factor involved with a guy’s public boot fetish. He say’s its not creepy and then says his original site was called the ‘Alix Kendall worship site’? Paul, there’s gotta be other niche/fashion sites out there worth talking to that don’t cross the line so far into fetishism.
I changed the original name because it was too creepy
Paul, there’s gotta be other niche/fashion sites out there worth talking to that don’t cross the line so far into fetishism.
A few points:
1) There’s absolutely nothing sexual on the site. (Not that I’m necessarily opposed to sexual content either, mind you.)
2) By most definitions of the term, Barry’s site would not qualify as a fetish site, because there’s nothing sexual about it. But in any case, whatever he’s “crossing the line into,” I have no problem with it.
3) There’s nothing wrong with fetishism per se. (I think you’re confusing fetishism with perversion.)
4) For years I’ve been posting Rob Ullman’s cheesecake illustrations on this site. Do you have a problem with those? If not, why not?
5) What I like most about Barry’s site is that it’s super narrow and super-deep — an obsessive look at a very specific enthusiasm. He’s not a stalker, he’s not a criminal, he’s not a troll. He is, in essence, a boot geek, just like those of us here are uniform geeks. I’m cool with that.
THANK YOU Paul. You can explain ME better than I can. THANKS for GETTING IT!!
The “super narrow” and “super deep” part is what unnerves, Paul, mainly because it’s a mirror on all obsessiveness. The first thought is, “Gee, what a nutty thing. Boots!” Then it slowly dawns on you that while lady newscasters in boots ain’t your thing, you did spend 45 minutes in the bookstore at your daughter’s university, agonizing over which $15 t-shirt had the most accurate rendition of the throwback logo from the school’s Golden Era, and more than once, you’ve paused a live sporting event (in the presence of other people), to analyze the subtleties of sleeve stripes or sock styles, and you realize, you’re just as crazy as ol’ Bootsy. It’s just a different flavor of craziness.
That level of self-knowledge, well, it feels creepy.
I have no real issue with the content of his site, but it leans more towards fetish site than it does fashion/boot site. It just does, not that there is anything wrong with that (thank you Jerry), but it does make you feel like you are treading into a peculiar territory.
Personally, after I read the interview (it was very interesting)I gave a little, “whew, that was a little bit of a strange trip” to myself. Then I moved on. I do like getting out of my comfort zone because it means you are getting your mind going and taking in new things. However, I did feel like I was encroaching on something that I felt was a place where I didn’t feel right. That’s just me.
I also have to disagree that it is just another geek site about boots…just like us with unis. Not the same ballpark, not really the same sport even. We here look at uniforms, regardless of who they are on. We just care about the unis. Granted we may comment on how some may wear the unis, but the focus is always more aesthetic based and on the unis. His site is strictly about boots on women. Granted, they are both interests in a very general use of the word (unis and women in boots), but interests driven by two separate parts of the brain / motivations (for a lack of better word/phrase).
CortM – I agree with your take, and I think this is something that feels weirder than it is.
There are a lot of things on the Internet that are about very specific, singular subjects. It just that this one happens to be a straight guy who cares about what’s worn below the waist of a woman’s body.
I don’t know why this feels weird, but I think the weirdness says more about our standards and sensibilities than Barry’s.
I guess what makes it feel ‘weird’ is that he doesn’t seem to be a boot geek. IMHO, a boot geek would analyze boot trends, styles, designers, etc. They would look at the specific styles favored by certain TV personalities, regions, etc.
This one is simply “Alix Kendall wore boots today” followed by 10 still frames of Alix sitting on a couch with her coworkers. Feels like the weird guy leering at a girl from across the food court.
I don’t have any problem with fetishes or fetishists. I guess I come here for the obsessive study of the inconspicuous and having something revealed to me that I wasn’t previously aware of. This comes across as surface level oggling without any analysis/insight.
4) For years I’ve been posting Rob Ullman’s cheesecake illustrations on this site. Do you have a problem with those? If not, why not?
For whatever it may be worth, my answer is yes. Yes, I do. I try to skip over them – as I did with this interview – but they look like they belong on a calendar in an auto body shop. In, like, 1952.
If we can endeavor to change the way Native Americans are depicted in sports, perhaps we can do the same with the way women are.
I don’t see the creepy thing. Doesn’t feel any different to me than the late, lamented Neck of State presidential tie-blog: link
What is creepy to me, just on a personal aesthetic basis, is the height of the tiny narrow heels on so many of those boots. A boot is functional and attractive because of its sturdiness. A boot is hearty and sure-footed and, even when it’s all fancified and dressed up – whether it’s a woman’s Jimmy Choo or a fellow’s Tony Lama – it retains a spirit of ruggedness. So a super-long stiletto heel completely undermines the boot in both form and function. Two inches, three tops, and the bottom of the heel, where it touches the ground, must be at least half the area of the top of the heel.
Not all Furries or Bronies are into it for the jerking-off. Or, at least, that’s what they’ll tell you. But some are, so to deny it as a motivational force is dishonest, and a little creepy. Same here. If link didn’t think it was a little creepy himself, he probably wouldn’t mind if his wife or daughters found out he was behind it. And that’s a good distinction between Barry’s site and this one. Uni Watch is supremely geeky, but I don’t care who knows I’m into it. I’d be surprised if Barry’s readership is as open.
This is like people responding to NSA spying (or other gov’t intrusions) by saying, “If you have nothing to hide, then you’ll have nothing to worry about.”
But that’s not how it works. A desire for privacy doesn’t necessarily mean you’re doing anything wrong. It *may* mean you’re doing something that a good chunk of society might not approve of or embrace, but that often says more about society than it does about the activity in question. This is what has kept gays in the closet for centuries. Happily, that is now changing, although we still have a long way to go.
The fetish community (of which I’m not a member, but I know a bit about it) deals with this kind of crap all the time. Fetishes are, in general, harmless. But they don’t go over well with the general public, so there’s an element of secrecy involved. But that doesn’t mean there’s anything wrong with fetishism.
Hell, just ask Rex Ryan.
Terrific article on Bronies recently from The American Conservative:
We don’t really have to draw assumptions about Bronies: They keep and share shockingly sophisticated data on themselves.
G.D. you arrScott! I clicked on the link not knowing what a Bronie was and my Midwestern nievete’ is now shattered. To quote Bob Seger; “I wish I didn’t know now what I didn’t know then.”
Nah, Bronies are just modern-day Trekkies. People seem to forget the extent to which people used to think of Trekkies in the 1970s and 80s as weird, likely deviant and maybe even subversive. I seriously doubt that the incidence of furry sexual fetish among Bronies is much different than the incidence of alien costume-kink among Trekkies back in the day – that is, low, and just something you’ll see in any affinity group.
To wit: link (Check out the Klingon chick’s boots!)
I don’t know much about the Bronie community, but from what I’ve heard its mostly younger fathers who can find some enjoyment in watching My Little Pony with their kids. Absolutely nothing sexual about it.
I’ve never seen the show, but from what I’ve heard there is some content that adults can relate to also.
I agree. Let’s take a few different angles.
1. The first thing that pops into everyone’s mind if a guy says to a woman, “I like your boots,” without any other context, is that he’s flirting/interested in the woman. That’s essentially what he’s doing here. He tries to say, “No, I’m not fantasizing about you,” but since he doesn’t give another reason (i.e. I’m a fashion critic, I’m a boot manufacturer, whatever), that’s where our mind goes.
2. If you have to say, repeatedly, “No really, it’s not sexual,” then you realize others might interpret it one way. But when you not only still do it, but defend it, it comes off as creepy. It shows a lack of understanding of both why the women are wearing the boots and why you shouldn’t advertise you’re just looking at the boots.
3. If it was a fashion blog, talking about boot trends or what does or doesn’t work with different outfits, then it would be different. The intent, then, is clearly to help people, not leaving it open to interpretation why you’re looking at the boots — and “I just really like boots” doesn’t cut it.
4. If it was a guy writing about sports uniforms, then it’s assumed we’re not watching because of how cute/not cute the guys are — we’re watching the game, and happier when its more aesthetically pleasing. But again, see #1. Heck, even a woman writing about sports uniforms or men’s clothing with an approach like Paul’s, as long as she doesn’t spend an inordinate amount of time fixated on their butts or something like that … fine. But this? No.
5. Straight guy walks up to a random woman. “Hey, I really like your boots. Mind if I take a few pictures of you just walking around in them and put them on the Internet? You can keep shopping.” I think most women would look at him a little funny, say “No,” and get really self-conscious about the guy.
6. These women are just trying to do a job and look professional, and he’s kind of taking it a direction they may or may not even know about or feel comfortable with. And he says he’d rather not talk to them or have anyone know it’s him. Think the women in his office would wear boots if they knew he had the blog? Creepy.
7. Now yes, TV people put themselves out there for the public to see, so I suppose they have to know anyone can watch for any reason, including looking at their boots, ogling other body parts, heck, maybe even doing that thing some guys do when they’re by themselves and an attractive woman is on TV, by which I mean reaching for the bag of Doritos, of course. (No, that’s not what the kids are calling it nowadays.) But it’s one thing to think that’s going on and not see evidence. It’s another to see evidence someone is watching your, and everyone else’s, newscast, very closely, not for your content, but for your boots, without any other context. And only your boots. OK, and maybe for the legs underneath them. But definitely not anything else … unless they’re cute …
… unless, yeah, creepy.
8. I’d be more comfortable with this if he were taking pictures of “boot models” who specifically signed up for the task. Surely there are women who would want to do that sort of thing, showing off special stockings and the oh-so-cute boots they found on clearance at Nordstrom’s. But again, he’s kind of taking something really out of context and using it for his own pleasure. Even if non-sexual, still creepy.
9. Don’t get me wrong, he’s not alone. One of the teams I worked for encountered a photographer who worked/s for an “online cheerleading magazine.” Goes to games and takes nothing but pictures of the cheerleaders and the dance team. All game long. Visited the site. Nothing but cheerleader and dancer pictures. No articles. No news. No coaching features or safety tips. Just galleries of pictures of cheerleaders and dancers. Not even pro-quality pictures. Hyup.
Just because he’s not alone, though, doesn’t make it right. Creepy.
10. Could “Newscasters in Tight Shirts” be passed off the same way? A lot of newscasters wear tight shirts, after all, right, and just to look better or be more comfortable in a jacket, not to be sexy, right? And we’re just looking at the shirts because we like the shirts. It has nothing to do with how they show off the breasts underneath them, right?
Yeah, don’t think that site would fly, either.
11. I’ll end with this: I know one of the newscasters mentioned in the article personally. Won’t say which one. I’ve worked with her. Very friendly person and, yes, very attractive looking. She knows her looks are important and help her out — she and I can even joke about the advantage it gives her over me, and it’s significant — but she’s always fighting to prove herself as a newscaster and journalist rather than just a pretty face. Really don’t think she’d like to be seen as just a pair of boots.
Maybe the boot guy needs to think of these women more like people than … not even boot models … than just pairs of boots and legs and consider whether or not they’d want to be seen as just a pair of boots and legs.
Sorry Paul. Love the site most days. Think you missed the boat on this one. Think you basically just profiled a fetish site. Nothing wrong with fetish sites … as long as they admit they’re fetish sites. Unfortunately, though, this one seems to be in denial.
Fear not — only chalking it up as a loss for today. Will still anticipate tomorrow’s column.
I haven’t been using Twitter very long but out of the 212? followers this Blog has on Twitter OVER FIFTY are newswomen who have been featured on the Blog. They are OBVIOUSLY NOT creeped out by it. I wish I was a better writer and I wish I had more time because then I would write more about the fashion and be able to more research and be able to name the maker of every Boot on the site. BUT OBVIOUSLY you haven’t looked at every post because I’ve written plenty on trends and shown plenty of new styles when they come out in the late summer and fall. BUT THANK YOU EVERYONE for the feedback. I will work on improving the blog. One final thought. IF YOU THINK MY BLOG IS CREEPY, YOU ARE REALLY REALLY NAIVE ABOUT THE INTERNET
Following up on yesterday’s comments about presidential NOBs, Reagan had the link.
Also, one NOB format that wasn’t explored in Paul’s ESPN column: the MNOB, or middle name on back. Like say, this Cristiano Ronaldo dos Santos Aveiro has link.
The Giants sure do look classy in their suits. Contrast that with today where college teams meet the president while wearing flip-flops, like in that decorum flap a few years ago when (I think) a lacrosse team met President George W. Bush looking like that.
At least today the jersey the team would present to the president would be tackle-twill sewn and not that iron-on ’80s stuff. I’ll say that in favor of today’s fashions.
I just noticed that link!
When you put a football player’s nickname on a football jersey, you’ve got a football jersey that refers to the football player. Not a football jersey that refers to some other guy. A well-intentioned failure, that gift to Reagan.
Shoulda gone with “Dutch.”
By that time, “The Gipper” referred very much to Reagan himself. I doubt many Americans knew the nickname’s origin by that point.
Besides, those who did would have recognized it as a football reference.
I know, but public ignorance doesn’t excuse anything. The Gipper was an actual guy who played football. Reagan was nicknamed “The Gipper” after playing the real guy – who, remember, played football – in a movie. Even Reagan’s nickname was a direct reference to the real-life guy. If it were anything but a football jersey, I wouldn’t have thought of the actual George Gipp.
Though in fairness, that was right at the tail end of the golden age of NFL nicknames, so there’s that. The “Gipper” jersey doesn’t work for me, but the intentions were great.
NBA All-Star jersey leaked:
More news on this — and some other big NBA news — on the blog tomorrow.
They sure are trying to push this sleeve thing.
Maybe next year they’ll have teams start wearing pants so they can try to sell those too.
George Karl gave his take on the jerseys, mentioning both advertisements and selling to women.
Interesting news about the Raptors redesign, considering how hilarious a lot of the Toronto media is finding the Toronto FC commercial.
Also curious to see if the sleeved template is going to be the base template for any new NBA uniform set next year given its ubiquity this year.
the KU throwbacks are awesome
remember when they had that hideous red alternate?
Yeah, I actually didn’t mind the reds. What was surprising to me in the article was that Bill Self seems to have quite a bit of pull as far as uniform decisions go. He doesn’t like something? It’s out!
Yeah, Self hated the red, but they’d wear it out of contractual obligation.
I’m a daily reader of UW and absolutely love the site, but some of the Q&As are way too long. Why can’t you condense the best and most interesting info into something shorter? This piece lost me after about the 4th or 5th question.
This is the condensed version.
If some of the content on the site doesn’t interest you, for whatever reason (length, subject matter, tone, etc.), no problem — nobody’s forcing you to read any of it, and you didn’t pay anything for it.
I’ll keep posting content that interests me. The rest is up to you.
Amen, Paul. I might not be particularly interested in a given topic, but I trust your tastes, and that you’re going to write about things that will interest us – otherwise, I wouldn’t have come to Uniwatch in the first place. If there’s 5-10% I may not be interested in, that leaves 90% that I am – not bad. And it’s your site – I’d expect it to reflect your interests!
By the way, as a native of the Twin Cities myself, I can vouch for the charms of Alix Kendall (with or without boots), and I fully understand the inspiration behind Barry’s site!
Paul, in the future, please only post subjects that I will find of interest. Thanks.
Good fetish site find Paul!
Of all the uni trends that’ve come out lately, I’m digging the patterns/textures that are making a comeback. Of course some are guilty of overuse, but I think this link uni looks pretty good. That whole “we let the team design” concept was stupid, but I liked the pattern look – from afar.
Reminds me of the 90s Georgetown and FSU patterns.
They tried the clear boards in MN a few decades ago (around the time some teams tried hockey pants instead of brezzers) Clearly we prefered the regular ones.
That boot fetish website is among the creepier things I’ve seen on the internet.
Agreed. I cleared my computer history after clicking the link.
Fascinating. It’s worth noting that Barry’s site is hosted by Blogspot, which requires “adult content” sites to be flagged as such. His site is not flagged — nor is there any reason for it to be.
I was joking.
…says reader of a polyester fetish website.
huge difference between male writer commenting on aesthetics of male dominated sports world from a fashion perspective and male writer commenting on female footwear for male audience from a non-fashion perspective.
If that site once, just once, mentioned the designer or type of boot, I would agree with your comparison terrible human
Someone didn’t read the entire interview.
I liked the interview, but Josie, you nailed it. His site isn’t terribly analogous to Uni Watch for this reason:
huge difference between male writer commenting on aesthetics of male dominated sports world and male writer commenting on female footwear for male audience
Sure is. Doesn’t make his blog inappropriate or unworthy of our discussion, but it’s important that we recognize the distinction.
I must have missed the part where only a male audience is allowed to read Barry’s site.
Josie, I REALLY Wish I did know the designer and style of EVERY Boot featured on the site. But WHEN I do know, I share that information. Here’s a link to ONE OF THE TIMES I MENTIONED THE DESIGNER AND STYLE link
It’s not about “only a male audience is allowed to read Barry’s site”, but it’s very clear from the interview that he’s writing for a male audience, and even with his “few female readers” Barry admits he’s “always wondering, ‘Is that really a woman, or is it a guy using a woman’s handle?'”
Again, I don’t mean to cast any aspersions what you’re doing, Barry. Only pointing out a major difference between your site and Uni Watch, contra some of the comments posted above.
Women are not prohibited from reading but he says in the interview its a mostly male audience and that he doesn’t really believe there are women who read it. The subject matter is one that I would find fascinating if it was written as more of fashion of the news critique. I’d read that blog.
I’m sorry for judging you Barry, you seem to come from good intentions, but I’m surprised Paul is being so glib about something several of his readers are showing reservations about and not because it’s “boring” or “not what I come here for”
“Polyester fetish”? Flannel forever, yo.
…and that’s when we need a “like” button.
I agree with Cameron’s assessment of Oriole Bird!
I wish he had put the Oriole Bird higher on his list, but I loved most of his comments. I completely agree with his opinion of the Swinging Friar.
White Sox – “I like how it’s all green and stuff.”
SF – “I guess I like the glasses. That’s sort of good.”
Red Sox – “I like the way the pants are blue.”
Cameron should rank more things.
Speaking of Kenny Williams, did Barry Brite ever feature William’s GF Zoraida Sambolin (former Chicago NBC-5 and CNN anchor) on his boots site?
Zoraida has been featured 14 times. THANKS!! link
Just a note on the Brett Hull wearing Rawlings hockey gear. I have a hat and some promo pics of Hull and Rawlings gear. He was the spokesman for the equipment. Don’t know if it lasted more than one season.
Dont judge Harbaugh harshly. The high cost of living in CA manifests itself in many ways with coaches. Harbaugh buys cheap pants, USC assistant coaches (Wannstedt said this) carpool.
I don’t object to Harbaugh’s $8 pants. More power to the guy.
But pleated khakis in 2013? Is his Walmart on the other side of a time warp to 1993? Can he pick up some acid wash jeans while he’s there?
It reminds me of a site back in the early days of the World Wide Web (and who uses THAT anymore?) – The Red Blazer Pages, a collection of anchorwoman pics taken off station and network websites. Tried to find it a few years ago and it had been taken down, but it’s probably somewhere on the Internet Archive.
No idea if any of them were wearing boots.
should we talk about burying the lead? or burying the LEDE? im not providing snark here – just soliciting your thoughts on lede/lead.
Worth mentioning that the Blazers caricature cups are a throwback to link.
The former home of the Minnesota Fighting Saints had clear boards due to poor seating arrangements. After the Minnesota Moose moved in the IHL demanded advertizing.
Alexander Julian’s pervasiveness into Charlotte sports culture in the late 80’s / early 90’s bordered on obsessive.
Yes, he did the Knights and Hornets unis, but did you know the seating bowl at the now-closed Knights Stadium was designed to resemble Julian’s signature color block sweaters?
Back in early days of the web, there was a site that highlighted weather ladies. Prob still around.
Liverp00l announced tie in deal with dunkin donuts. Apparently, there is only one in the UK (as opposed to 7000 in the USA).
Glad i dont drink coffee anymore.
What’s the matter? Was this guy not available for an update?
Wow, I can’t believe that the Evanston Wildkits, would actually change their logo!
It should also be noted that 1) The logo on the wall in the background is clearly the older design, and #2 the team name “Wildkits” is an obvious reference to the Northwestern Wildcats who play a little under 3 miles away from ETHS.
Also it should be noted that the football team was at one time coached by John T Riddell who went on to found Riddell helmets..link
From today’s column: the 1972-1973 Alberta Oilers
I’m stunned. Did Edmonton invent comic sans?
Interesting Falcons concepts floating around
large image: link
Though I’m not sure if the number font is from the Cincinnati Bearcats or Milwaukee Brewers, leaning towards the latter
It’s not the Brewers; they use Times New Roman, which means link swells into a rounded serif-ish form at the bottom.
A big improvement over their current mess, but I think double-digit numbers would be hard to read. It looks like this font isn’t quite either of the ones you mentioned.
IIRC, the old St. Paul Civic Center (where the Xcel Energy Center now stands) also had transparent boards when it opened.
A link from John Thorn via Twitter today. Never seen anything like the meander waistband on Ed Nolan’s trousers. Neoclassical pants!
Is that what you call that pattern — “meander”? Never knew that!
I’d learned that in some long ago Classical Civ course, but since forgotten it. Thank goodness for link. Apparently the pattern has been appropriated as a symbol for the fascist Golden Dawn party in Greece, but I still like the pants.
My piece on Wes Welker’s new helmet is up:
I agree that the black padding goes a long way towards making the new helmet look so large.
If you didn’t find todays post creepy, guess what you are?
A broad-minded person who can accept other people’s ideas and interests even when they don’t match one’s own..?
In all fairness a broad-minded person could see how someone else could find the booted newswomen’s website “creepy.” I know I find it creepy but I can also see how someone else might not.
I also reject the comparison of the boot site to Uni Watch. This site is more more geeky than creepy and I don’t think it objectifies women, unlike the boot site.
The zeros on those link are reminiscent of a link…
Paul, has UW ever explored the topic of players wearing link or link goose-eggs??
Statements like “who’s cute as a button” and “Some guys like the bare legs” is what starts to get to the creepy level to me. You’re not commenting on the boots – you’re commenting on the women.
That’s fair, though I’m wondering how different the conversation would be if women’s boots weren’t associated with hookers and dominatrices.
It’s not what you think or say – it’s who or how you say it to
So what- she’s cute. Saying someone is cute isn’t always sexual. I’ve told girls (who aren’t my wife) they look cute, and there was no implied flirting.
It *can* be done in a creepy way, but its not always creepy.
The cute line is money
And saying it as an anonymous poster in a website’s comments section crosses the line from “complimentary” to “creepy” a whole lot quicker than saying the same thing in person to a personal acquaintance or co-worker. The comment may not be intended as sexually provocative or objectifying per se, but it’s sure no stretch for someone to perceive it that way. Which I would think a matter of common sense, even though I’m told that’s a quality I’m largely deficient in.
There were some interesting nuggets from Bill Self in that Kansas story.
“The uniforms we have now are probably my least favorite uniforms that we’ve had since I’ve been here, without question,” Self said. “So I wanted to make sure we got other (alternate) uniforms to wear. It’s not anybody’s fault; I agreed to it.”
“Going forward, our uniforms are going to be solely traditional and we’re not going to have any of this stuff other schools are going to,” Self said, ostensibly referring to some of the camo/neon uniforms teams like KU sampled last season.
“I’m not into marketing and understanding all the ins and outs of that … I think there are so many things done through apparel that’s so positive for so many places. You see what’s happened at Oregon, and Baylor has done some things. Louisville has done some things (in wacky color combinations and neon). Even Nike came out with a line last year where all the teams wore something totally different than what they have ever done before.
“I think those things are great and I do think kids enjoy them, but for us, it doesn’t fit to who we are as much as it does with some other people. Not everybody can boast of having the history and tradition that we have. It doesn’t mean we won’t do some things periodically, because we will and I’ll tick people off who say, ‘Why are you going to wear this for this one game?’ There will be some things going on we agreed to do with adidas periodically because that’s part of the contract. We’re happy to do so, but the core of who we are needs to stand strictly from a tradition standpoint.”
PTI had a good segment on the NBA allstar jersey and the jerseys with sleeves
Where’s the outrage/moral indignancy over the J-league and its jingoistic uniforms?
Pretty cool that uni-watch posts pervert interviews.
Really strange to be so anti-native imagery with sports logos and names, but to be perfectly cool with perverted misogynists.
Under NFL News, Marc Burgess says, “My daughter picked up ‘The Young Author’s Do-It-Yourself Book,’ and on this page it has what is clearly late ’80s- early ’90s John Elway.”
I disagree. The Bronco QB depicted in the illustration looks much more like Craig Morton, who wore #7 before Elway got there. Check out this photo: link