Skip to content

Dark Knight Rising: The Griffins Jersey Design Contest Winner Is…

Matt Harvey

[Editor’s Note: Paul is on his annual August break from site. Deputy editor Phil Hecken is in charge from now through today, although Paul is still on the clock over at ESPN and may be popping up here occasionally.]

By Phil Hecken

I’m pleased to announce that the winner of the Grand Rapids Griffins Jersey Design Contest for 2018 is (as you see above) Matthew Harvey. Congratulations to Matt on having his jersey submission selected. He’ll now work with the Griffins to have this come to fruition, and the team will wear a (hopefully exact replica) version of this on December 29, 2018. The team will not only wear jerseys based on Matt’s design, they’ll auction them off to fans for charity after the event. Matt will be invited to the game as a guest of the Griffins and (if they’ve do what they’ve done with other UW contest winners in the past) give him the VIP treatment at the game. So congratulations, Matthew!

My thanks again to everyone who participated, whether you made it to the final 12 or not, as well as to Allie Benner from the Griffins, who facilitated this year’s contest. My thanks also to everyone who voted in the contest. There were some, ahem, hiccups — but with the help to the great Larry Torrez (from whom you’ll hear more below), we ran a nice clean and fair contest. Any of the 12 finalists would have been a great choice, but there can be. only. one.

As a quick aside, probably half of the submitters (maybe more, I never really did the math) send me their design with some comment(s). Most of them are of the “here’s my submission” or “thanks for hosting this” variety, but some of the submitters went to great lengths to describe their submission or to impart some other information.

I loved what Matt sent in with his (now winning) submission:


My name is Matt Harvey.
I’m a huge fan of the Uni-Watch Site and these design contests.
Attached is my entry for the Grand Rapids Griffins Jersey Contest.

If you have any questions, please let me know.

Matt Harvey

(Oh…i’m not the Matt Harvey for the Cincinnati Reds. haha.
Im the Utah Jazz fanatic Matt Harvey from Ogden, UT. haha)

Thank God you’re NOT that Frat Harvey, er, Matt Harvey! And thanks for the clarification.

Once again, here were your 12 Finalists, and here’s a look at the submissions from all 61 participants.

Thanks ladies and gents.

[adrotate group=”2″]

Timberwolves Introduce “New” Uni

Yesterday the Minnesota Timberwolves introduced a new/old/fauxback uniform which they will debut on October 31 (against the Jazz) and will wear an additional four times (for a total of five) this season. I’m not sure if this is another of the ridiculous “names” Nike gives to its uniforms, but this one is called “Classic.” May the UW Gods strike me down if this joins the other four verboten names.

First, the corporate speak:

The Classics Edition will celebrate the team’s heritage in honor of their 30th season and feature the same uniform design that the team wore from 1996-2008; all black with green tree lining. The uniform was unveiled through a video earlier today that can be viewed at The team will be putting out content on that site all season long to celebrate 30 years of Timberwolves basketball.

Lets take a look at the uni:

The pants are asymmetrical with their placement of logos: the T-wolf and the “MT”. The “MT” is on the front left leg, while the wolf is on the side of the right leg.

Here’s an upclose look at the wolf logo:

There is also a 30th season logo that will “appear on creative elements and merchandise throughout the season”:

Oh yeah, almost forgot the hype video:

You can see more (and the entire T-wolves set of uniforms, plus a few photos of the original unis) by clicking here.

This is another uni that I never really liked when it came out, but it’s grown on me over the years. I can certainly tolerate its return for five games this year — and I’m sure the fans will love it (as will the retailers). It’s probably the most distinct set of unis for a pretty vanilla team that’s had a moribund playoff life for its existence. Maybe that changes now. Or maybe not. Either way, the originals are back for a few games this year.

[adrotate group=”2″]

UTenn Unveils “New” Unis

In quite possibly college football’s worst kept secret (at least for this month), the University of Tennessee Volunteers introduced new uniforms yesterday afternoon — actually, while they’re technically new, they are really more of a throwback to 1998.

What’s new and different? Well, for one thing, the white helmet returns to a completely solid orange stripe. Previously the back of the helmet had a checkerboard pattern at the base.

Also changed are the pants. They’re completely white (both home and road — apparently there will be no orange pants and also the team is ditching the “smokey gray” alternate as well). Last year, the pants had orange stripes which also contained the unfortunate checkerboard pattern at the base.

The team will also reportedly wear black cleats again, as well. All this is a nod to the 1998 National Champs, who were quarterbacked by a guy not named Peyton.

Here’s the obligatory hype video:

Here’s a look at the home and road (graphically) by my buddy Chad Fields (who had actually tipped me wise to this on Wednesday)

The team didn’t release a ton of photos, but here’s what we did get:

Nice, right? Anything without that checkerboard stripe is an improvement, and it will be interesting to see the team going old school with the black shoes. Hopefully they’ll pair those with calf-high white sanis (think USC or ‘bama). That will be very sharp indeed.

[adrotate group=”2″]

About The Griffins Contest Polling

As mentioned in today’s lede, I asked Larry Torrez if he’d be kind enough to break down the new polling being used for the Griffins Jersey Design Contest. I wanted to see how much “cheating” or “vote stuffing” took place each day. Since Larry set the poll up, he obliged. Here’s Larry…

. . .

Results for GRG Jersey contest and some notes…
By Larry Torrez

First off, a tip o’ the Hat to those who took the time to participate in this years contest. Producing quality designs can be a challenging experience at any time. Presenting them to ones peers, especially those who are denizens of Uni Verse, a very uni savvy bunch indeed, is double tough and deserving of praise.

I had asked Phil to use the Typeform app for this years GRG Jersey contest for a couple of reasons. One. It’s easy to operate (it really is Phil!) and does a good job presenting and gathering voting data. Secondly, It allows for real time viewing of said voting data and when it happens, identify, and remove obvious vote stuffing (via IP Address). I had read the complaints in the comments section about vote rigging more often than I would have liked. We wanted a fair, honest accounting of the votes and I believe we got just that.

I wanted to share with you some of the more interesting numbers in the vote. Over a third of all the votes were cast by smartphone, and the contest averaged near 800 votes for each group. That may not sound like a big number until you look at this number 16704. That is the number of people who actually viewed Group A but did not bother to submit their vote. That my friends is a bigly huge number. Our goal was to have a clean and fair contest, and I believe we succeeded in that.

Here is a rundown of the numbers:

Just so you know, 3% to 5% of a large vote are duplicates and are very easy to track and remove.

Group A
280 or 22.54% of the submittals were duplicates submitted by 5 people.

Group B
37 or 6.76% of the submittals were duplicates submitted by 3 people.

Group C
34 or 5.27% of the submittals were duplicates submitted by 3 people.

Group D
232 or 27.07% of the submittals were duplicates submitted almost exclusively by 2 people.

A dozen or so people, out of the thousands of people who voted, decided that voting often was the smart thing to do. It wasn’t. Would counting all the duplicate votes have changed who made the final round? In a word, yes. Did it happen? No.

When passing on voting data to Phil I noticed that some people were still stuffing the ballot box days after the contest ended.

. . .

Thanks, Larry!

[adrotate group=”2″]

Raffle reminder: In case you missed it earlier this week, our friends at Vintage Brand are raffling off two free items from their extensive catalog for a pair of lucky Uni Watch readers.. Full details here.

[adrotate group=”2″]

The Ticker
By Kris Gross

Baseball News: I agree with this guy: Dear Padres, pick a uniform, stick with it (from John Mahaffey). … This article features a great look at old Pacific Coast League uniforms (from jmac6540). … Pop Chart has a cool print of baseball’s uniform history, which includes 121 different unis from baseball’s past (from Josh Pate). … Plaques that appear to have been stolen from Citizens Bank Park were found in a Philly scrapyard (from Michael).

NFL News: Two Holleys, no FINOBs (from Pro Football Journal). … TJ Watt wore cleats paying tribute to other other Pittsburgh teams last night (from Mike Slavonic). … The Panthers concluded their preseason with a third consecutive never-before-seen uni combo last night. … The Jags wore their new black jerseys for the first time last night (from Clint Richardson). … The Eagles had no midfield logo or painted endzones last night (from Blake Fox). … The initial reactions to the Bengals changing their helmet design in 1981, well, wasn’t great (from Damon Amendolara).

College Football News: Eastern Kentucky went all black last night. … Here are this weekend’s uni combos for TCU, Oregon, Virginia,
Kansas, Texas State, Kent State, Utah State and Stony Brook (from Casey Loerwald, Noah Kastroll, Patrick Homa, Ben Jamin). … Mississippi’s new white helmets have a state outline sticker on the back, featuring a shark fin (from our own Alex Hider). … Hardin-Simmons University has new helmets for the first time since 1990 (from Jordan Hofeditz). … Purdue has some pretty sweet train tracks painted on their field (from Adam). … The story behind South Carolina’s script helmets. … Kentucky will honor offensive line coach and linebacker, who are both battling cancer, with helmet sticker this season (from Travis Coffey). … New wordmark for NC State’s endzones (from ACC Tracker). … Florida State will use old school endzones (from Jim Weber). … Michigan State gave a preview of players’ warmup gear and coaches’ getup. We definitely need more of these (from Jeff. … Here’s a preview of new uniforms for Garden City Community College (from Scott Nuzum). … Josh Claywell sent in this sweet helmet, that his high school is currently wearing.

Hockey News: Pete Wentz of Fall Out Boy wore a modified John Tavares jersey at last night’s concert at Nassau Coliseum (from Mike Chamernik). … This video shows the Penguins’ ice being laid down and painted (from Tommy).

College Hoops News: Villanova has new unis for the upcoming season (from Bill Russo).

Soccer News: Ever seen a player wear No. 306? Now you have, and here’s why. … Now for some notes from Josh Hinton: Footy Headlines put together an overview of all 2018-19 Bundesliga kits. … Atletico Madrid’s third kit has leaked.

Grab Bag: After some controversy earlier this week, the US Open is changing its policy on women changing their shirts. … Delcastle Technical High School in Delaware has new volleyball uniforms. … Neil Armstrong’s spacesuit is slowly falling apart.

[adrotate group=”2″]

And Finally…

Well boys and girls, my annual August run during Paul’s sabbatical is officially over today. Can’t believe tomorrow is September 1st!

There are so many folks I have to thank, this may appear like a credit scroll at the end of a movie. So if you’re one of *those* people who leaves at that point in the movie…well, sayonara. For everyone else…

First and foremost I want to thank the entire UW crew, all of whom stepped it up this past month to assist me in bringing you the (hopefully pretty great) content we had this past month:

Thanks to John Ekdahl, our webmaster, who also fills in for me during the weekends during August, for his stellar work behind the scenes; Brinke Guthrie, who contributes the “Collectors Corner” every Tuesday, and also contributed a great post on US Open fashion; and our ticker-dudes: Jamie Rathjen, who not only held down the ticker fort, he stepped up with not one but TWO ledes this month; Alex Hider, also solid and who contributed a lede of his own; Anthony Emerson, who also wrote a piece (and an off-uni one at that), looking at the political logos of 2018; and Kris Gross. (Heh, that sounds like a commercial.)

I also want to thank the “may as well be on the UW staff” guys who all stepped up and worked with me on articles this month: Jimmer Vilk, Graig Kreindler, Ronnie Bolton and UW Stalwart Chance Michaels (he loves it when I call him a stalwart). Also thanks to Wafflebored, Derek Smith, Chris Whitehouse (aka “ManCave” with more great colorizations), Don Stokes (another stellar colorizer), and Mark Anderson, all of whom were awesome and helped provide some pretty amazing content!

Finally, my biggest thanks go out to Larry Torrez for all his work on the Griffins Uni Contest polling. He is the reason the voting went as smoothly as it did, and believe me, that is no small task. He went above and beyond on this one!

And finally: thanks to all of you, the readers, for coming to Uni Watch every day (right?) and letting us do what we do. You’re what makes this little community great.

Gotta love when I get a tweet like this. It makes it all worth it to me:

I know college football season has already started — but I’m taking this weekend off. I’m pleased to announce the entire SMUW crew (Terry Duroncelet, Joe Ringham, Rex Henry, Dennis Bolt, Kyle Acker and Ethan Dimitroff) will all be back this year, and well restart the Sunday Morning Uni Watch with a week one wrap next Saturday, followed by a rundown of week 2 the next day (and we’ll be on every Sunday for the rest of the season). These guys are all also great and what makes UW the best place for all your college football uni needs!

Finally FINALLY: thanks to Paul for letting me steer the ship in his stead once a year during the weekdays. Hopefully I didn’t hit an iceberg along the way. I know this was a very stressful time for him so I’m glad I could help him lighten the load.

I’m giving you the keys back now, buddy. She’s all gassed up and I gave her a bath.

[adrotate group=”2″]

Comments (55)

    Thanks to Phil and Ek for keeping things rolling this month. Great job.

    I’m sorry I didn’t have a contribution for you this year.

    Thanks Jerry — turned out I had plenty of content this month (so no worries). In fact, I still have some stuff in the can which I’ll run once I get back to weekends!

    The Panthers’ black pants should be OK with the white jerseys, but not when they’re as short as they were with the long blue socks underneath.

    What I would like to see next from the Panthers is wearing their black tops with their white bottoms one day. I don’t think they’ve ever done that.

    Yes, they don’t work with the black jersey or blue jersey, but are tolerable with the white jersey, sort of similar to the Patriots and their navy pants. Ideally you just keep silver pants whether wearing white or colored jerseys, but if they must wear the black pants, pairing them with white jerseys (and blue socks) is the best option.

    Congratulations Matt, your jersey will look amazing on the ice I’m sure (I especially love the very nice combination of black and red)!

    If it means goodbye to those awful gray uniforms so be it, but I liked the little touch as well.
    That being said, I love going back to that particular era’s uniforms, simple and bold.

    I also like the traditional look (simple and bold) for Tennessee.

    The established programs should stick to their familiar uniforms and leave the costumes (along with playing on Thursday and Friday nights) to the programs that rely on gimmicks.

    I did like the checkerboard at the tail of the helmet stripe. The rest I didn’t care for, but that alone I think would be a nice touch.


    So both of my assumptions with the Griffins contest have been confirmed now through actual data. (1.) Cheating has been a part of it. and (2.) Those in the first group get the most exposure and twice as many votes cast than subsequent groups.

    Thanks for the transparency and congrats Matt!

    I agree with you Devils, however…to maximize exposure, ALL the submissions should have been on one day and not trickled in.

    This round-robin / tournament effect still does not feel completely transparent and at the same time, say if several people from one house-hold sharing devices were voting for the same uniform, there is NO EXPLICIT rule that says ONE IP = ONE VOTE.


    You are correct.

    There is no explicit rule saying one IP=one VOTE. There is a problem with one IP, ten, twenty, or thirty dup votes, over and over in a ROW, unless you are from a family of rabbits, or cockroaches.

    Let’s be straight on that point – vote stuffing happened. We started by removing the obvious cheats first, and there were some extremely clear examples of that in the contest.

    Rather than punish those cheats directly, Phil in his wisdom sought to use a light hand in his dealings with this matter as he felt that the point of the contest is to share designs within the UNI WATCH community as a whole rather than blackball people who fail to play, either willing or unwilling, by the voting rules.

    Phil also chose NOT to show real time voting this time around, as he was concerned that although the Typeform tool could do this easily, he felt that it would encourage people to cheat more since they did not care, or did not realize that we were monitoring the vote. In future votes seeing live vote totals is a possibility, but first things first. The goal was to provide as transparent a voting process as possible.

    The tool will not eliminate voter fraud entirely, but we chose to start with stupid and work our way up to total transparency in future votes.

    I think they are trying to come up with the best possible method, and are actively trying to weed out fraudulent votes. That is the most you can ask for.
    Perhaps the “fairest” option would be for the first round to include every submission. Then the leading vote getters (whatever threshold they want to set) move on to a final vote.

    I concur with Greg, this process is a step up, but I also agree that the entire field of submissions be displayed all at once. Either way, I love these contests!

    The saving grace of the Griffins contest is the Griffins get the final say. Obviously in (past) contests the finalists may not have been 100% genuine (not all, just a few) – However, in the end the Griffins get the only vote that truly matters. I’m guessing their past picks for the winners were 100% legit finalists since they all were strong designs.

    But the entries on each day compete only with one another, so it doesn’t matter whether one day produces more votes than other days. The day-to-day difference in voter participation has literally no effect on the contest.

    What would have a highly unfair, skewing effect on the contest? Listing all 30+ entries in a single column to scroll through vote on. There’s a lot of literature on exactly this practice: The longer the list of choices, the less attention people pay to choices beyond the first few, and the fewer people bother casting a vote at all.

    Fair enough, then create stipulations.
    Eliminate submissions that have / had copyright infringement; submissions done in crayons, submissions that persons that have won in the previous year and cap it through a screening process done along with the Griffins org at say 20-25.

    Having a “special mentions” category isn’t a bad thing.

    First off, congrats to Matthew.

    With regards to the voting process, I think this year was way better than previous years. I would have liked to have been able to see the results in realtime to track where I was, but displaying it probably helps people who try to rig the vote, so whatever.

    Was this year better because there were only ~60 entrants instead of ~120? Maybe. Voting on groups of 15 is easier than groups of 30, as RS Rogers notes above, after all. I’m a software engineer by day so I’ve got this whole system in my head for what I would build to randomize the hell out of a 120-entrant field and do all the voting in different groups and blah blah blah. No one is going to build that (including me) so we go with the next best thing and this seems to have worked well.

    That said, I agree with Kelly on the concept of filtering things out before even getting to the vote. If the Griffins say no reusing logos, don’t allow voting on concepts that reuse logos. If they don’t want people to win more than once, filter those out, too. If there are 120 entrants again and 60 can be filtered out, we’re back to where we were this time, which is pretty good.

    This is going to sound like sour grapes, which I accept, but I would also say that everyone should have to use the same (or at least a similar) template. IIRC, with three of the last four winners, the Griffins have selected a design that didn’t display the back. What happens in that case? Does the winning designer get to come back and design the back without the time constraints of the contest? Do the Griffins just go ahead and do it? Does the winner only get the front half of the jersey as a prize? However it works out, it means not everyone is one an even playing field.

    Okay, I didn’t mean to write so many words here. Just some thoughts from someone retiring from the contest. I hold the dubious honor of being the only three-time finalist not to actually win the contest; clearly I’ve got the ability to design something that you voters like (thank you for that) but the Griffins don’t, so I’m thinking I’m stepping aside after this one.

    AHEM, you are assuming those from the Griffins are not looking at the results of the voting from groups. Matt’s is a fine design and a worthy winner, but lets not forget that he was in group 1, had more exposure and received the most votes. You’d be naive to think they don’t look at that. Not saying they use those numbers in their decision, but Matt’s entry got twice as many votes as anyone else, but also twice as many voted in that group.

    Why would Griffins ownership factor vote totals into their decisionmaking process? Even assuming that data was given to them by Phil, of what possible value would the vote totals be to Griffins execs? A few dozen people who will never attend a Griffins game or purchase Griffins merchandise cast more votes for one design over the other? So what? They’re running a business, not a niche website popularity contest.

    But even if we assume that Griffins execs pored over the vote totals, we would have to grant that Griffins execs are at least as rational and intelligent as average people. So they would also have noted that the vote totals differ between groups by day much more than they differ among entries on a given day. So if Griffins execs saw and considered the vote totals, and if they’re not morons, then they wouldn’t have given the vote totals much weight anyway.

    The only way we can conclude that the vote totals played any meaningful role in the Griffins’ final decision is to assume that Griffins execs are idiots. But if we assume that, then nothing about how the contest was run matters, since it all comes down to the capricious choice of uninformed stupid people.

    “Matt’s is a fine design and a worthy winner, but …” No, there is no “but” there. The whole point of the contest was to find fine designs and worthy winners to forward to the Griffins for them to select among. If Matt’s design is fine and worthy of winning, then the contest achieved its purpose. It worked. This was not a flawed or skewed or unfair process, it was a success.

    RS, I’m going to play the devil’s advocate a little simply because even though I mostly agree with your point, I don’t have the certainty that you do.

    If we assume that the Griffins come to Uni Watch to tap into the expertise in this community, why would we assume that their respect for that expertise ends after the finalists are chosen?

    You are so certain that there is nothing but 100% equality between a finalist from Group A and one from Group C, but can you tell me that it didn’t come down to some exec trying to decide between Matt’s design and Zach Rueger’s and looking at the votes to see what “the people” thought? And then saying, “Well twice as many people liked this one, so I’ll go with it.”

    In the end, the Griffins chose. We don’t get to know why they chose. Which means that we can’t rule out them using the vote totals for any part of it.

    As I said earlier, I think this was the best vote we’ve had here. Props to Phil and Larry for pulling it together. That doesn’t mean it can’t continue to get better, though.

    And on the point of “Matt’s is a fine design and a worthy winner, but…” What if I come at it as “Matt’s design didn’t have shoulder logos, didn’t have a back, and lacked contrast, but the one thing it had going for him was the most votes and he ended up winning.” Does that suddenly make it a more valid argument?

    Apparently my original response to RS was eaten by the Internet.

    RS, I’m going to play the devil’s advocate a little bit, because while I mostly agree with you, I don’t think we can be quite so certain as you come across.

    If we accept the fact that the Griffins organization comes to Uni Watch to take advantage of the expertise that resides here, how can we assume their reliance on that expertise ends after the finalists are named? As you say, “They’re running a business, not a niche website popularity contest.” So if they’re looking at Matt’s design from Group A with 400+ votes and trying to decide between it and Zach’s design from Group C with ~150 votes, why wouldn’t they think, “I need to get back to running this business, clearly the people liked this design more than twice as much. Done.”

    I’m not saying that happened. We don’t know how the Griffins made their choice. But because we don’t know it, I don’t think it’s fair to rule out the possibility of vote totals mattering.

    As I said earlier, I think this was the best-run vote I’ve seen here. Congrats to Phil and Larry on that. But best doesn’t mean it can’t get better.

    On the idea of “Matt’s is a fine design and a worthy winner, but…” being flawed… Okay, what if I say “Matt’s design didn’t have shoulder logos or a back and was lacking contrast, but what it had going for it was having the most votes…” would that suddenly make it okay to question the process?

    Last year the Peter Griffin jersey got voted in as a finalist (before being disqualified, of course). Clearly, not all finalists are equal. I think we should always question how we got here to work to get better.

    I’m looking at the numbers, and I just have one question… since when is ‘submittal’ a word? Not ‘submission’?

    I must have misunderestimated you ;). True, 43 invented the Bushism, but I enjoy flouting them.

    Actually, link, but it probably hasn’t been used since Lincoln’s day.

    Now GOML!

    Submittal is most definitely a word, and an active one as well; I see it in use almost every work day. In my line of work, a submittal is a document that provides complete information on an item for sale, often a customized product. Usually all text, although dimension prints and other images are attached to it for convenience.

    The way Wiktionary describes both submittal and submission, they’re interchangeable – although, clearly, from the little red squiggle as I type it, submittal is not universally recognized.

    Yes, submittals are common in my line of work (architecture), too. They are product data and shop drawings that the contractor sends to the architect or engineer for review prior to construction.

    I wonder if the Eagles left the end zones blank because of Temple’s game vs. Villanova tomorrow. Then again, I attended the Jaguars/Buccaneers preseason game at Raymond James Stadium last night and the Buccaneers had their marks painted on the turf despite USF hosting Elon there tomorrow night, so what do I know?

    That is possible. In which case I would assume they are going to leave the field blank for that game as well, as it would be a short turn around to repaint in time for the season opener on the 6th. My guess is it is a combination of leaving it blank for Temple’s game, and also they might have some special field designs planned for the opener.

    The Wolves throwback seems pretty silly. They didn’t ditch these that long ago, why bother getting rid of them if you still want to wear them as a throwback? Using their original design as a throwback makes more sense. The Wolves 90s design is incredibly dated. I mean this would be like if the Seahawks wore a throwback of their 2002 thru 2011 design now, instead of wearing a throwback to their original silver and royal blue design (single helmet rule notwithstanding)

    It seems especially silly not to use their original uniforms since both the Magic and Hornets are celebrating their respective anniversaries with their original sets (though Orlando didn’t technically have the blue alternates during their inaugural season).

    Classics Uniform is actually the one name that makes sense, Icon, association, yea those are dumb.
    But classics actually describes the uniform good.

    I’m really not of a fan of how Nike seems to be eliminating pant striping from most of their college football uniforms. Maybe it’s an overreaction to negative feedback on their recent designs, but it just looks so plain. There’s a reason that every set of college (and NFL) throwbacks are so warmly welcomed by fans – classic stripes are timeless.

    Nike simply doesn’t understand uniform design, or for the sake of standing out will avoid traditional uniform elements just because.
    It is almost as if they listen to feedback, but only part of it. Like with the pants stripes, people respond negatively to truncated or other oddly designed pants stripes, so they ditch pants stripes altogether, rather than bothering to find out people like simple pants stripes.

    What’s true of San Diego is also true of USA soccer: Pick a look and stick with it.

    Phil it was a fantastic month! Got to hear you on Hall of Very Good……you’re a 5 tool player!

    Thanks Rick — which one was it? I’ve been on 3 times (I’m guessing it may have been one I linked to this month — the one where I dis the PW softball tops). There’s two others: link and one I did this spring with link, discussing his (then unreleased awesome book).

    Not to toot my own horn here (ok, just a little), the original 2017 ‘cast was the most listened to show of the year and I’m pretty sure the one I did with Todd earlier this year broke all records for listens. At least that’s what Shawn told me.

    The “guy” writing about Padres uniforms is Major Garrett, the chief White House correspondent for CBS News. The fact that he takes time out of his extremely busy schedule to write about his favorite team’s uni history for a hyper-local website means that Major Gets It.

    When I saw “pick a uniform and stick with it” I felt that this could have been written about several professional teams in MLB, NBA and the NHL.

    Happy 83rd Birthday, Frank Robinson!
    Otherwise known as “Mr. Stirrups” in the Uni Watch Uni-Verse!

    That Pop Chart Lab print looked very nice… until I got to the 1944 Detroit Tigers uniform – with a completely wrong Olde English D!! The Tigers wore the same style D for a nearly unbroken string (1960 was the one year) from 1934 to 2017, yet they show this relatively new interloper that they put on the jersey just this year? Sacrilege!

    Good job, Phil!

    To fine-tune that sentiment, “Pick a look and stick with it”, I say “PICK A BROWN AND GOLD LOOK AND STICK WITH IT!”

    Garrett says that few fans at Jack Murphy Stadium wanted Padres caps in the 70’s. Well I was proud to wear the brown cap and then later the brown with the gold front cap, although I was a Mets fan at Shea Stadium. I guess I was a weirdo rooting for the Mets but I never wanted their cap – I owned Padres, Expos, Astros and Cardinal caps in my teens!


    Thanks for fixing the Griffins contest to eliminate the voting fraud. I chose not to enter this year because I was so disheartened at what took place last year after working very hard on my design. The winning design looks sharp. I’ll be looking forward to getting back into the contest in ’19.

    It’s time for the Panthers to ditch the silver. IMO a white helmet would make a cleaner, less muddled look.

    Phil-Great job during August. Interesting content and well done!
    Paul-Welcome back, sorry to hear the news on your mother and yourself. Hope you both rebound well.

Comments are closed.