By Phil Hecken
Follow @PhilHecken
Earlier this week, I noticed the Miami Marlins tweeted out an image that intrigued me — a graphic that had the Marlins wordmark and the simple phrase “Let’s Go Fish!” No, there was no apostrophe catastrophe, everything was in order; it was the kind of almost old school graphic you’d see on Twitter a few years ago. In fact there was nothing really out of the ordinary about it, except for one thing.
The colors:
“What’s so unusual about that?” you say. Well, first of all — the colors are all bright and cheery (even gaudy). Very much what I picture when I think of Miami. But, to my mind, very un-Marlinlike, as they have, for the past decade or so, seemed to wear as much black as possible in their uniforms. They started out with a healthy dose of teal, but gradually morphed into a team that wore more black elements than any other color.
A few years ago, they rebranded, and while they introduced an orange alternate, they still wear their black tops and caps quite a bit. So that graphic was refreshing.
Then I noticed their Twitter avatar. I’m not sure, exactly, when it changed, but it now features a beautiful blue background.
Now, when the Marlins became the “Miami Marlins” during their 2012 rebrand, they introduced a new logo and color scheme, one that makes generous use of those same bright colors seen in the graphic above. Namely, orange, blue and yellow — the colors I think of when I think of South Florida.
Both “Miami” and “Marlins” look fantastic when rendered against that sea-blue background:
So good, in fact — I have a very modest proposal. It’s time for the Marlins to ditch the black (alternate jersey) and embrace the blue. That’s right — I’m calling for them to add a new jersey…but on the condition the retire the black jersey and cap (combo) permanently. They’ve already got a nice white jersey (they can keep the black cap with that if they have to), even though they have a perfectly beautiful orange cap and sleeves they could wear with the white jersey.
The team (or Majestic/New Era) already produce blue caps and jerseys — and those look quite nice:
The team has even given *tacit* approval to the alternate blue jersey by having celebrity guests wear it on the field. A tweet “asking” the Marlins to add the blue jersey seemed to meet with strong approval and likes (not that Twitter should be the barometer of anything, but the lack of negativity was a good sign):
Hey @Marlins … How 'bout scrap the black jersey and add a blue one? pic.twitter.com/UYPMNrsNS2
— Phil Hecken (@PhilHecken) April 26, 2016
It’s a modest proposal really. And you know I’m (generally) NOT a fan of alternates. However, I think the Marlins, with a blue-orange-yellow color scheme, could really carve a signature uniform set, much the way the Oakland A’s in the early 70s owned gold, green and white. I’d even go so far as to have the Marlins wear only white, orange and blue jerseys (remember when they ditched the gray jersey and orange caps for an entire season?), and drop the gray jersey AND pants altogether. They could rock the white/blue/orange over white pants at home, and go blue or orange over white pants on the road. Lots of teams did that back in the 70s and 80s, why must they have gray pants now? (Yes, I went there.)
Yes, I know the owner is a big fan of black — and yes, we all know that black jerseys sell well — but c’mon man: this is South Florida. Google Miami Beach and what imagery do you see? What colors? Not a lot of black. Yeah, I know they’re technically not playing in Miami Beach, but they’re just across the Bay, man. It’s close enough.
It’s time to ditch the black and go blue. The only thing I’d change about the cap seen above is the brim — make that black for a little contrast. But it’s time for them to add this concept asap:
I played around with having the workmark say Miami (maybe for the road?), and having black numbers, but in the end (and at the suggestion of Jimmer Vilk), I went with white. I think it looks pretty good, and clearly, it would evoke the full South Florida vibe their social media are trying to push.
“Well, Phil, if you like the orange and blue so much, but they also use bright yellow, why not add a yellow jersey too?” you would in no way ask? I thought of that. I think, for now, the proposal to add the blue jersey is enough.
Baby steps.
OK readers — what say you? Time for the Fish to officially “Ditch The Black” and #WearBlueJerseys? Fire away.
Colorize This!
Occasionally, I will be featuring wonderful, high-quality black and white photographs that are just begging to be colorized.
Got one colorization today — and I’m not quite sure how I did this — but yesterday’s featured artist, Chris Whitehouse of “ManCave Pictures,” had sent me three colorizations, but I somehow omitted one of them (and even more strangely, substituted one he’d done in a previous submission).
So, today, I’m running the submission I inadvertently left out yesterday (sorry, Chris!)
Click the photo to enlarge.
Hi Phil,
Here is the 1901 Chicago White Sox.
Enjoy!
Chris”‹Thank You!
ManCave Pictures, LLC
Super job, Chris — apologies for missing this one yesterday!
Insert “No Rain” Chant Here…
April showers may bring May flowers, but apparently they also bring May rain.
On Robert Marshall’s favorite day of the calendar year, it looks like today’s Mets/Giants game (which includes a free pair of socks for the first 15K attendees) may be rained out — and at the very least, looks like there will be lousy weather for a game.
Which is a shame, because I’m (hoping to be) attending said game with Paul and James T. Huening, who’s in town for the weekend. Let’s hope the weather gods *shine* on us and the game’s not a complete washout.
I know at least one reader will be attending, but if any of you NYers are at the game and feel like saying “Hi” — we’ll be (way up) in section 536 row 12.
Rain is great on March 21st, but I could do without (a lot, anyway) today. Fingers crossed.
UW’s Friday Flashback
In case you missed it, Paul’s Friday Flashback on ESPN looked at how purple and teal became the hot uniform colors of the ’90s. It affected all major sports too — in fact there were 22 teams in the Big Four pro leagues that either came into existence or were reborn with a new team name in the 1990s (including the Sharks, who hit the ice in 1991). Of those 22 teams, half of them — 11 out of 22 — used purple and/or teal in their inaugural color schemes.
Great read, so be sure to check it out if you didn’t catch it on Friday!
Enjoy!
Too Good…
for the Ticker
Got a note yesterday from Leo Strawn, Jr. — I may as well just call this section “Leo Strawn’s Too Good For The Ticker” — I kid, of course, but Leo always sends in great stuff.
Here’s Leo:
Hey Phil,
Saw the Luis Aparicio pic on UW, Saturday. That’s an oddity; 1965 road jersey and 1966 lid. 1966 spring training, maybe?
Thought I’d share a couple of other mismatches that I’ve seen lately:
Nap Lajoie, either prior to being traded to Cleveland in 1902 (after playing in 1901 and one game of the ’02 season for Connie Mack) or after being traded back to Philly in 1915. The oddity about this photo is that, according to Okkonen, the Athletics didn’t wear pillbox caps in 1902 (and he says the 1901 version didn’t have stripes although this photo of Matty McIntyre in his only season with the Athletics in ’01 would suggest otherwise), and Philadelphia didn’t begin wearing that classic “A” logo until the ’02 season. The Athletics wore striped pillbox caps with road jerseys similar to those shown in the photo of Lajoie, but that was during 1914, prior to Nap rejoining Philly. They wore pinstriped (rounded) caps and uniforms in 1915-16 (his last two seasons in baseball). Perhaps they wore pillbox caps from ’01 in spring training or the first game of 1902 or wore the 1914 uniforms in spring training or early part of the ’15 season?
Also, Sportspaper recently posted this odd photo of 1996 Chicago White Sox uniform (with Comisky Park patch on sleeve) matched with caps worn from 1976-81.
Cheers!
— Leo Strawn Jr
Thanks, Leo! As always, great stuff!
OK. Now, onto the ticker…
Uni Watch News Ticker
Baseball News: On Friday night, Steve Cishek had a bit of a stirrup malfunction (from Alex Carson and Dan Merker respectively). … The PawSox will wear Pawtucket Slaters (1946-49) unis/caps on throwback Thursdays at home in 2016 (from Phil Pane). … Remember the Boombang (protective pitcher’s helmet)?. Yeah, it seems like its not catching on. … The Phillies will be wearing a special “painters” cap (aka faux-pillbox) and maroon pinstripes for “70s night” on June 3 (h/t Craig T. Nelson). I wasn’t able to find any photographic evidence (other than in this NL All Star team photo correction: 1979 Japan Tour photo — but not all Phillies are wearing them, and they have far more stripes than the three stripe version supposedly worn), but according to Dressed to the Nines, the Phils did join several other National League teams in wearing the pillbox cap in 1976 — I’m assuming that was also worn in a non-All Star setting. That throwback uni will also have this patch (also from Craig). My only qualm with these is they should be zipper-fronts (at least for authenticity’s sake). … Reader Benjamin Hendel received an ‘Interesting e-mail from MLB.com Partners’. He states, “No logo on Giancarlo’s helmet, and no chin guard either, so we know it’s not an action shot. But this is sent from an MLB account, and it uses MLB logos, so the no logo on the helmet is odd. Doubly so when you scroll down and see that they have an MLB Collection and use the Marlins logo there.” [I clicked on the link Benjamin provided and it appears to actually go to an oakley ad — PH] … Someone had to do it: Edward Kendrick says “I provide for the Uni Watch site the tracking for the Arizona Diamondbacks uniforms this season. I was hoping that this could be covered in the Ticker.” … The Tampa Yankees wore Superhero jerseys last evening (from Mike Nessen). … Mizzou & Tennessee may not have has the most aesthetically appealing uni matchup yesterday, but their stirrup games were on point (from Mark Johnson). … I’m not 100% sure if the Iron Pigs wore these jerseys yesterday, but they were being auctioned off (from Thom Pucks). Check that — yes they did. … Orioles jerseys seem to show up in the strangest of places (h/t Weave). … Ole Miss and LSU had a pretty strong color vs. color game yesterday (via Mike Tremblay). … Was David Ortiz wearing white shoes yesterday? Sure looks like it (from Daryle S Grof). … In 1950, the Brooklyn Dodgers trotted out a forerunner to modern technology during spring training: a machine designed to call strikes (from Ted Arnold).
NFL News: Are the San Diego Chargers moving back to white NOB lettering on the blue jerseys? (thanks, Paul). … This article highlights the speed with which draft jerseys (w/new player NOB) must work, but what’s even more notable is the horrible mismatched shades of green are on this Jets’ jersey. Is Nike even trying anymore? … Sweet shot of the “Kansas Comet” (aka Gale Sayers) wearing a beautiful letterman jacket at the NFL draft (h/t Jerry Adams). … A couple people sent this in: the last pick in the NFL draft is given a “Mr. Irrelevant” jersey, complete with the number of whatever the last pick is. That’s usually pretty funny, except the Broncos traded the last pick of the draft to the Titans, so “Mr. Irrelevant” was given a jersey for the wrong team. … We knew the San Francisco 49ers were going to have a 70th Anniversary patch this season, and here’s a look at it on the jersey (from D’Andrewlo Russell). Here’s a closeup of the patch & details (from Stephen Peters). … Jim Weber wants to “Make NFL Helmets Great Again” — you can read more about his quest here. … “When Navy’s Keenan Reynolds was drafted in the 6th round by the Ravens, it looks like he was wearing an older Ravens hat,” says Bob Novotny Note the old “winged B” logo on the right side.” … Cross-sport (sorta) alert! Here’s a backpack for all those Green Bay Ducks fans out there, from Gabe Flores (also posted in the NCAA Football section).
College Football News: If you weren’t able to watch the Oregon Ducks Spring Game (you can read about the uniforms both sides wore here) yesterday, here are some highlights — check out the scorebug: it reads “Webfoots” and “Mighty O” (thanks to Nick Colosimo). … The Arkansas Razorbacks tweeted out a photo of one of their players being drafted by the Jaguars. Unfortunately, they used the old Jaguars logo (good spot by Sam Middlebrooks). … Cross-sport (sorta) alert! Here’s a backpack for all those Green Bay Ducks fans out there, from Gabe Flores (also posted in the NFL section).
Hockey News: Here’s a beautiful photo (and a surprising non-baseball submission!) of the 1930 NHL New York Americans & Ottawa Senators, posing together in Atlantic City, New Jersey (sent in by the one and only Bruce Menard). … Dallas Stars coach Lindy Ruff has his initials (“LR”) on his cap (nice spot by Dustin Perez).
Soccer News: Yesterday Everton players wore “t-shirts to pay tribute to those who fought for justice for the 96” (via Jim Collier). … Here’s a look at the new Manchester U secondary kit (from Patrick Thomas). … Patrick also says, “Want to downgrade so no one will even know what the blob in the middle is?! Just ask AC Milan!” … Still more from Patrick: Costa Rica going with New Balance for their kits. … Leicester City are so popular now they’ve run out of jerseys.
Grab Bag: From Graham Clayton: “A nice infographic showing the helmet design and colours of all Formula 1 World Champions from 1950 to 2014.” … “My Dad & I were at the Grand Slam of Curling event (great sport to watch & play, am I right?) in Sherwood Park, AB (Fri)day, and I noticed quite the unoriginal logo on the rinkside ads,” writes Neil Kemp. “Wonder if the folks in Dallas have seen it.”
And that’s all for this week. Thanks to the few of you who tweeted or submitted via e-mail for the ticker, plus Leo for his TGFTT bit.
I’ll be back next weekend…but until that time…
Follow me on Twitter @PhilHecken.
Peace.
“I loved the solid teal Marlins cap, but they seemed to ditch it in short order. Much like the more recent orange cap, which I loved as well.”
— Jon Rose
That Make NFL Helmets Great guy forgot about the most obvious one – having the Ravens just freaking pay that designer and bring back the winged shield.
Or just use the B from the pants on the helmet. Instant classic look.
…and apparently he got attacked by internet trolls. The link to read more about the project now says that the article has been deleted.
Sayers link is dead….
Also, for the Marlins… why not mono-blue on the road?
Exactly. Would much prefer blue from head to toe than a blue jersey with white or gray pants.
Same here, not a fan of the softball-top approach, would personally prefer a monochrome look. But kudos for great use of striking, appropriate colors.
To be accurate the backpack should be labeled as an “Oregon Packers” item based on the picture.
Ditch the black for sure. Im no a fan of baseball but the astetics on the blue jersey has such a “pop” to it. It is attractive from 100 yards and 10 cm. Also to note has any other pro team had the balls to surround a blue like that with other bold colors in the last few years?
Blue Marlins, yes. Ditch the black. Bring back the Greys and orange cap.
Oddly, I like the Ducks spring game unis. Way better than the usual circus outfits for the season.
I’d be more than ok w/ the blue replacing the black. Worked for the Mets, Royals, & Jays, after all.
That’s my problem. Already have Blue and Orange in the division. It kind of dilutes their identity. I think teal should make it’s way back in. At least it was original.
That NL photo is definitely not from 1976 and not from an All-Star game. Giveaways are the Met henleys which are 1978 and later and Kingman was a Met in 1976. The Japanese billboards, plus a little googling, indicate this is the 1979 MLB japan Tour.
link
Thanks, Steve. Fixed.
Also, Ozzie Smith didn’t make his MLB debut until the 1978 season.
In that picture of George Foster sure doesn’t look like he is wearing a Reds cap. More like a Cardinals cap, but the two Cards aren’t wearing that style.
Regard Nap Lajoie pic – it was taken in Shibe Park (note the concrete and steel construction). Shibe did not open until 1909, so this pic had to have been taken in 1914 when he was traded back to the A’s.
Thanks, Frank! The person who posted it on FB stated it was prior to being traded to Cleveland, but I thought Nap looked kinda old in the photo. Appreciate the info!
Spring training photos contain lots of oddities for those of us with an eye for detail. With the Aparicio pic, of course the palm trees in the background is a giveaway. But back in the day teams routinely wore the previous season’s uniforms (many times just the roads during practices or work-outs.) I guess the new hats were available early enough for spring training (why not?) and as the photo suggests, the helmets were also.
Luis’ old team, the White Sox, changed from black with red trim to navy blue in 64, and there’s a bunch of 64 spring training photos somewhere – I can’t remember the site (I think it’s gone now) – but here’s a few pics showing players wearing the link with link The red outline in the cap’s logo disappeared in 64 and the color went from black to blue, so we know they’re 64 caps. The road jersey style was similar in 63 and 64 with a few big exceptions: the Sox introduced the modern powder blue flannel in 64 and there was blue/white/blue piping around the neck. The tv number also had a white outline. The lettering should have gone from black to blue, but these appear to be 63’s done in “navy.” I wouldn’t say it was a gradual change to blue – I think back in the 60’s a dark “navy” was seen as about the same as black. Hey, they were just uniforms- it was “good enough.”
Here’s John Buzhardt in the actual link (from Steve’s Baseball/That’s My Boy.)
The “Make NFL Helmets Great Again” reminded me of the traditionalist/classicist discussion from earlier this week. The title clearly is a play on Donald Trump’s campaign motto, but what struck me is what I think is frankly a knee-jerk reaction to helmet design of just saying every logo pre-1990s is superior and “let’s go back to how logos were in the 70s & 80s”. You can call it traditionalist or classicist, but what’s kind of hard to deny is that it harkens back to an era where basically white men had the largest (nearly only) influence on what was considered good design.
I mean let’s face it, a lot of uniform design since the 90s has been influenced & designed to market to a younger & browner sports fan. Elements such as black uniforms & pajama-style baseball pants are favored by younger and black and brown players & fans, counter to pre-1990s influences. The author using Trump’s catchphrase to basically say “let’s send our design to pre-1990, just crystalizes it for me.
Good points, Mike. I won’t disagree that there is probably more than an element of truth to it. But, as Paul says (paraphrasing here) — good design is good design. And, black-for-black’s-sake and pajama bottoms don’t strike ME as good design, no matter who came up with it.
That being said, youth (whether black, white, brown, yellow, etc.) have almost always “rebelled” against the tastes, likes, designs, etc. of their elders. I’m not so sure the author is opposed (or rather that today’s newer designs, no matter who influenced them) to logos/designs that are influenced by (or designed to appeal to) darker audiences so much as it’s designed to appeal to youth in general (who, as history has shown us) will almost always like (or at least be drawn to) design/style that is distinctly different from that favored by the generation before.
What I (as an older white guy) may think is “good design” and what a younger, darker guy may think of as “good design” will probably differ. But I think the same could be said for a younger guy of any color.
A millenial with whom I work (he’s white, with some native american blood) disagrees me almost reflexively whenever our discussion turns to sports unis. He loves camo and flag desecration, hates the Padres’ brown (despite being a San Diego native), and (get this), will almost always ask me if “I’ve seen the ___ new uni” (which I almost always have); he’ll wait until I give my opinion, and then will invariably disagree with it…simply because it will be a defferent opinion than his own (he does this with EVERYTHING, not just sports unis). I’m convinced this is because he sees meas an old white guy stuck in his views (and there is some truth to that).
But when I was his age, I did the same thing. I think it’s a symptom of youth, not so much color/race.
My $.02. YMMV.
I guess my biggest thing is I think “Good Design” isn’t just Good Design. I think its highly subjective. I believe what we consider good design is highly correlated with what were the norms in the era we came of age in. I think looking at colored tops and long pants are simply just not what we are used to. It’s not what many grew up watching, from a “design” standpoint there’s no reason to not have these things. We didn’t see many colored baseball tops in the 70s & 80s and almost none pre-1972, but why is it bad design? It doesn’t make it harder to see the baseball, it makes it easier. It generally doesn’t prevent us from deciphering the teams, generally it makes it easier than white-gray. They exist more now because the technology came about in the 70s to make it possible to do on an everyday basis & have them still cleanable and not fade quickly. Its outside the baseball norms, but from a functional or visual standpoint, it doesn’t impede the sport.
Looking at it from a color/race side, its hard to separate from youth. The demographics of those under 30 are browner than they were in 1990 and much more than 1970 and will likely to continue to get browner. Its hard to separate that if you talk to a millennial now, they are far more likely to be black/hispanic/asian than at any point in American history. So in some of the tastes that are influencing uniforms now, not only is it of course a larger corporate influence, but a large influence by people who’s culture had been shut out of design until the last several decades. I think what is considered good design definitely varies by age, but a lot of that age separation is colored by the racial demographics differences of said age groups.
Overall, I’m just of the opinion that “good design” is much more subjective than a lot of us let on, and based on things a lot more subconscious than we realize.
Good design is probably subconsciously what reminds us of a happy youth…thus I think the MLB designs from the early 1970s are classic and I would return almost every team that was in existence then to something similar or at least see them as a throwback once and awhile. Design is subjective and “good design is good design” may need to be re-phrased for me.
Younger people have different tastes in design and this is not always a bad thing. Using a music analog, were the Beatles seen as classic or “good music” by the so called experts at first? I have mainly imagined uniforms as art that I use to remember that time period. I am utterly opposed to designs or features that throw away tradition needlessly in search of a buck (such as adding black to sell more jerseys) or all this camo stuff or uni ads. So if young kids like the Diamondbacks unis, who am I to tell them they are wrong?
“Good design” manifestly is not entirely subjective. What’s subjective is whether something looks pretty. The mistake is confusing design, which is defined by functional success, and art, which is defined by formal beauty. Whether something looks pretty to you or to me says nothing about the quality of its design. For example, there are in baseball several alt jerseys that I think look great, but whose NOBs or even numbers are very hard to read. Legibility is a core functional purpose of uniform design, so those jerseys are, objectively, badly designed. No matter how pretty I think they look. Conversely, I can think of any number of hockey and soccer uniforms that I regard as ugly, but which clearly communicate the team’s name and identity as well as the player’s name and number. Those uniforms are well designed, no matter how ugly I think they look.
There is often an overlap between design and art, such that well designed things are often perceived as beautiful. To a great extent, for example, aircraft that look good in terms of commonly shared aesthetic values tend to be better designed vessels than those that do not. But not always. Concorde was a marvel of engineering, and an almost universally recognized beautiful aircraft. But as a commercial vehicle, it was poorly designed, and never fulfilled its most basic economic functions. Concorde was a bad design, even though most of us think it was a beautiful airplane. The U.S. Air Force’s A-10 attack plane is so remarkably ugly by commonly shared standards that it earned the nickname “warthog.” Everything that usually makes people say of an aircraft, “That is a thing of beauty,” the A-10 does the opposite. Yet the A-10 so perfectly fulfills all of its core functions that it is widely regarded as one of the best-designed aircraft in the history of military aviation. Even though most regard it as ugly.
For the most part, to the extent that we are discussing subjective qualities of a thing’s appearance, we are not discussing design at all.
This blog is subtitled the study of athletics “aesthetics”…aesthetics is a set of principles concerned with the nature and appreciation of beauty, especially in art. So while Paul often talks of the design of uniforms in your sense of the word, for me, the blog reaches me on the artistic side of uniforms, all semantics aside.
Yes, the Beatles music was considered good at first
I think its hard to say any part of uniforms are based on pure principled aesthetics considering how many changes have occurred over the 100 or so years of major league history. How could something such as the Tequilla Sunrise Astros or the “Bumblebee” Pirates be considered classic even though they were aesthetically radically different than anything from the previous 100 years? Is it just because we’ve seen them around for awhile? The Bears uniform numbers are classic now, but they were almost completely unique among NFL teams. Who’s to say the Seahawks uniform numbers won’t be seen as classic in 20 years?
I do agree, uniforms do need to be functional, NOBs and numbers should be legible. But baggy pants, colored tops, and etc don’t really effect functionality. Its an idea of preference, and in some sense just fads coming and going. Tight uniforms were not en vogue until the technology changed in the 1970s to allow them to be comfortable tight. Todays players don’t show socks sure, but the uniforms are baggy like they were in the 30s and 40s! What “design” is correct I feel has a lot to do with subjectivity of era
I’m also an older white guy but I don’t think that has anything to do with my feelings that MLB should be able to control to an extent, at least, how players present themselves on the field. Some thoughts:
-Pants should have to reasonably fit the player.
-Pants should not cover up any part of the shoes and touch the ground. Length should be limited to the top of the shoe…preferably with elasticized cuffs.
-Only the top button of the jersey should be allowed to be undone.
-What is up with guys pulling their back pockets out??? It’s ridiculous and hideous.
I think Big Papi is just about the biggest uni offender/abuser and he’s no young guy.
How about doing away with buttons altogether so you won’t have to concern yourself with how many buttons are undone in the first place?
The blue jerseys, fine, but big NO to the black NOB text. It doesn’t pass contrast test and in general I hate when a jersey’ NOB color doesn’t match the number color. It looks sloppy. Your job is to find the best-looking color from your scheme (plus white) that contrasts enough with your jersey color, and go with it. That’s white in this case.
#freedotem
Keenan Reynolds was at his host family’s house in Crownsville, MD (Middies have local families sponsor them while they are at the Academy to get away from the rigors for a few hours). No doubt someone had that old hat in a closet somewhere so we will take what we can get.
LOVE the Marlins blue but, yes, the pants should also be blue.
The Phillies definitely wore the traditional three-stripe pillbox cap on opening day, April 10, 1976, a heartbreaking loss to the Pirates. The Phils would have won if catcher Johnny Oates had been able to hold the ball on a tag at home with two outs in the ninth. Oates was injured (broken collarbone I think), the ball rolled free and the Pirates went on to win in extra innings. I still remember the photos the next day in the paper of that collision with Oates wearing the three-stripe pillbox cap.
Dave Parker was the baserunner who scored in the aforementioned collision.
Yes, the pillboxes were definitely worn by both the Bucs and Phillies on Opening Day 1976, but articles indicate that the Phils only wore them sparingly after that day.
Here’s a photo of the collision, in which you can see Oates’ pillbox cap on the ground:
link
Great article! Totally agree! Marlins need to rock the blue or make it teal jerseys! Also like the ticket content in regards to making nfl helmets great again! Couldn’t agree more !
Can’t get behind the “Make NFL Helmets Great Again” movement… The NY Giants helmet is currently GREAT. Love the NY, hate the underline GIANTS text. I’d almost rather them use a blank helmet to that logo. Also, even though I love the old Oilers helmets, having the Titans use them in place of their awful helmets is asinine. Ravens helmets have NEVER been good. So they may never be great.
What RGM wrote
100% same feelings here
‘”Mr. Irrelevant” was given a jersey for the wrong team.’
I think it is perfect. Just shows how irrelevant he really is.
While it is kinda funny… I’m actually curious if any “Mr. Irrelevant” players have managed to make it into the Hall of Fame.
No. There have been a few good players, but none have made it to the Hall of Fame.
Correct me if I’m wrong, but I believe MLB changed the uniform policy over the past several years/decades so that teams must wear some form of colored pants on the road (throwback games notwithstanding, I’d think)? That would require the Marlins to wear grey, or powder blue — or their *current* blue — or something not-white. I hope I’m wrong, but I do recall reading it somewhere (apologies, I cannot find any link) and thinking “Well, the A’s and other teams who wore only-white pants in the ’70s/’80s could never bring it back full-time.”
The 1979 Japan Tour photo has some interesting features…I think Pete Rose was very popular in Japan and was an early user of Mizuno, so the team is decidedly National League. The Reds toured there in 1978. The three Pirates we see all used different bumblebee options. The two Mets have different number fonts…in the late 70’s, sometimes the Met road jerseys used a varsity font with serifs inconsistently. The use of pillboxes with a lot of stripes by the Mets and Phillies in 1979 is indeed odd… I feel it has been discussed here before.
Couldn’t agree more. A Blue Marlin is a tasty drink indeed, with just the right orange accents:
link
I liked the Marlins new look when it was released, but felt it was lost on the black uniform. This blue look is great, enhances the original and very nice colour scheme.
I like the orange Marlins hat sith the new logo. Other than that, they need to go back to teal.
it is a great day for a wobblie even though there is no holiday bundesliga action.
my 13.5 hour shift is rained out here in chicago, but i will ask the cornmother if she might oblige you three by not raining in flushing meadows.
Keep the black jersey. Make the blue jersey the road jersey instead of that ugly grey jersey.
I did not like the racing stripe look (Mets, Indians) back in the day, but I am watching the Mets game right now and I must say those unis look great! Are these authentic? I seem to recall the strips were much more narrow.
The Mets throwbacks are pretty accurate and the racing stripes are the right width, give or take a millimeter possibly.
I wonder if that 1996 Sox picture with the mismatched hat/jersey combo was from a story calling Frank Thomas and the newly signed Albert Belle the new South Side Hitmen.
I would love to see the Marlins take the blue route. Honestly, I’ve always liked their redesign from 2012, just wish they weren’t so black-centric so this would be be preferable. Still wish there was some teal in there though.
Monochrome blue would be sweet for the Marlins. And, as much as I hate the softball jersey approach in principle, I’d love a mix and match with blue, orange, and white, with jerseys AND pants. It would create a distinctive signature look overnight. Just lose the frakkin black already.
Phil: I may as well just call this section “Leo Strawn’s Too Good For The Ticker”
Leo: link
:)
I’d go for the return of every one of those old NFL helmets (especially Pat Patriot for New England), except for the Giants, who ironically have improved by going further back in time to their 1960s “ny” logo.
The blue looks so much better for the fish than what they’re currently wearing! Get rid of the damn black already … Love that new idea Phil!
I am constantly impressed with Chris Whitehouse’s work. As someone that uses Photoshop on a daily basis (and has for many years), I can’t begin to tell you how excellent his work truly is, and how hard it is to achieve that level of product.
So, Chris, if you’re reading this, just know that you have a big fan of your work!
I dig that shade of blue for the Marlins…kinda puts me in mind of one of the Akron Rubberducks’ sharper alts.
Personally I like the colors of their stadium. Why not use those? Blue, green and orange. I think it’d look great, gaudy and all. And a unique color scheme.