Ferdinand Cesarano

I beg to differ. All three of these are examples of the inadequacy of pullovers and beltless pants, as they were all much better in the standard button-down / belted format. The Twins had one of the worst uniforms in an era with some profoundly bad ones. Between this unsightly mess (including its powder blue road version) and the drab slapdash uniform that preceded it, all combined with the inappropriate cap logo that belongs to a proposed name that the team never used ("Twin Cities Twins"), I'd say that the Twins didn't get good baseball uniforms and caps until 1987. As far as the Red Sox: while that uniform is not bad sartorially (unlike the Twins, the Red Sox at least knew enough not to put a blue logo on a red cap without outlining that logo in white), the Red Sox by their nature simply should not be wearing pullovers/beltless. That team is in the category of the Yankees, Dodgers, Cardinals, and Tigers, with designs that should remain the same for all eternity. But, sadly, the Red Sox and Cardinals abandoned their legacies in the 1970s; and seeing those historic teams clad in pajamas was downright embarassing. (Fortunately, the Tigers were only embarassing on the road, while the Yankees and Dodgers held firm, notwithstanding the Dodgers' ill-advised 1971 pants stripe.) The solution to the problem caused by shoving the S into the D is to restore the proper monogram: Here we see the S actually hooking the D, as it did on the Padres' caps going back to the PCL days.

The worst I have ever felt as a sports fan was in 1980 when the Yankees were swept in the playoffs by the Royals and the diabolical George Brett. By contrast, getting swept by the Reds in the 1976 World Series had been a bit of a downer; but the season was still regarded as a great success, with the team winning its first pennant since 1964 and thereby ending the Lean Years, with Thurman Munson being the American League MVP, and with Graig Nettles becoming the first Yankee since Roger Maris to lead the league in homers. There was a book written about the 1976 Yankees that was entitled That Championship Season, notwithstanding the loss in the World Series. But no one was going to write any books about the 1980 season. The regular season was glorious. The fans had begun the year still in a state of shock and mourning over the tragic death of Munson the previous August. But this sadness was assuaged by the arrival on the scene of a great young catcher, a local kid from Newark, Rick Cerone, who performed wonderfully both behind the plate and at bat, eventually earning MVP votes including one for first place. In addition, Reggie Jackson had his greatest season in 1980, hitting .300 for the only time in his career and leading the league in home runs. (Reggie would surely have been MVP if not for the fiendish Brett.) The surgically-repaired Tommy John had another great year in the rotation alongside Ron Guidry; and Nettles made a heroic comeback from a late-season bout of hepatitis to hit an improbable inside-the-park home run in the playoffs. This team, which won 103 games and held off a challenge from a 100-win Orioles team, was so good that it was destined to go all the way, or at least to reach its fourth World Series in the past five years. But someone forgot to tell the objectively evil George Brett. His three-run home run off of Goose Gossage in the seventh inning of the third game of the playoffs, which reversed a Yankee lead, was devastating. Brett is the opposing player whom I hated and feared the most, and never so much as on that night. Eventually I came to appreciate the full story of the 1980 season, and to enjoy the memory of the Goose's bulldog-like saves (this was long before LaRussa invented the one-inning closer), of Oscar Gamble's clutch hitting, of Gaylord Perry's late-season cameo, and, most of all, of Rick Cerone's act of helping a city to get over its grief. But the villainous Brett really broke my heart. I hope he enjoyed his hemorrhoids.

The Giants built their own park.

This is pretty interesting. Especially this part: The elmination of affilliated ball from some cities, combined with the availability of players, add up to a tremendous opportunity for independent leagues. (Even as the affilliated minors seek to poach two independent-league teams, St. Paul and Sugar Land.) One paragraph made me chuckle. It starts with: But, before I could even fully formulate the thought "So buy the damn teams!", the paragraph goes on to say: With no personnel decisions to make regarding either players or coaching staff, the job of "owning" a team in the affilliated minors consists mainly of getting the stadium situation squared away, in addition to getting local sponsors and arranging the broadcast deals. If the "owners" of the affilliated clubs can't get this done, then what use are they? It's obviously better for the Major League club to own its own minor league teams, so that, if the Major League club wants stadiums to be up to a certain standard, the club can pay what it takes to achieve that.

Or the other option was Christian Hackenberg. Oh, snap!

Since when does Major League Baseball prohibit white pants on the road? In addition to the A's, other teams who have worn white pants on the road were the Astros, the Braves (Aaron/feather uniforms), the White Sox (collared shirt uniform), the Padres (most notably in the 1984 World Series) and, most recently, the Cubs. The only limiting factor is that this would not be appropriate for most uniforms. Of the teams mentioned above, the Cubs and Padres would have looked better with grey pants; it was kind of ridiculous that all games in the 1984 NLCS featured both teams in white pants. The A's, Astros, Braves, and Sox all had designs that were sufficiently attractive to justify the use of white pants on the road.

That was true for all the teams using powder blue, and for most of the teams using pullovers. But the 1970s marked the best period for the A's (that is, when they weren't wearing coloured pants) as well as for the Pirates, the only two teams that looked good in pullover jerseys and beltless pants.

The only important point is that Perez was fun to watch in the AAF (just as was his teammate Trent Richardson, despite similarly underwhelming statistics). And, as noted, whoever makes decisions for XFL teams also clearly found his play worthwhile.

I don't know about that. Neither team should really have to give up its identity on account of this merger. College games of the sort of "Wildcats vs. Wildcats" happen, and it harms nothing. Then we have frequent soccer matches between two teams both called "United". And let's not forget the CFL's old Roughriders / Rough Riders situation, which is exactly analogous to this, in that it resulted from the merger of two leagues.

It all has to do with his backstory, that he didn't play football in high school. That makes him fascinating. Also, there was the tantalising glimpse of him in the AAF, in which he started the season strong. Despite the fact that he eventually tailed off and was even replaced at Birmingham, he remains a player whom people are interested to see, and in whom coaches evidently see some quality.

Oy.

All yellow was used for the road uniform in the set the A's wore up through 1971. In the uniforms adopted in 1972, yellow pants and green pants were included, even if they were rarely used. The one time that the yellow pants made an appearance on a very prominent stage was during the 1975 All-Star Game, when Vida Blue wore them. But, with a few rare exceptions, the A's wore white pants for all games from 1972 through 1980, probably because that set's yellow pants and green pants looked ridiculous.

They walk to Las Vegas?