Ferdinand Cesarano

How does the Birmingham Iron conflict with the New York Guardians? (Maybe they'll fight over the mighty Luis Perez!) Anyway, I'd love to see the San Antonio Commanders enter the XFL.

No. College is for higher education. Anything that undermines big-time college sports even a little (the D-League in basketball, the XFL in football) is a step in the right direction. No way. The Nets' D-League team is exactly where it ought to be: in the Nets' former home, the Nassau Coliseum. (Now we must hope that this building finds a buyer and reopens.) Yes, indeed! Like the Nets, the Clippers would then be placing a D-League team in the parent club's former home.

A sports-related cap doesn't have to be from my top team, but it does have to be from a team that I like to some degree. Of my approximately 100 sports-related hats, all but one is from a team to which I have some emotional connection (mainly the teams in my sig). The one exception is a Rochester Red Wings cap that has their alternate FC logo, for Flower City. I wear that for the same reason that Bruce Kulick wears British Knights. Sometimes I am tempted to buy a cap for the sheer beauty of a logo. I remember feeling this upon visits to the Devils team store, because that logo looks so good on a cap. But I can't bring myself to do it, as I would feel uncomfortable wearing a cap of a team that I don't care about (except in the case of the aforementioned FC cap). I also have plenty of hats that have non-sports logos, for instance, logos of pop culture entities such as beloved television shows and my favourite rock band, logos of venerable media outlets, symbols reflecting various aspects of my ideology and/or identity, and even one cap with my full name on it, boxer style. In the choice of a cap the aesthetic quality always plays a role; but for me that alone is not sufficient.

Yes! But in button-down, of course.

Los Angeles Angels is indeed a goofy name. But Anaheim is worse, for the simple reason that Anaheim is nowhere. I realise that it now has a population comparable to Pittsburgh and St. Louis. But the difference is that Pittsburgh and St. Louis are major cities, while Anaheim is a place near a major city. In Pittsburgh or St. Louis, there are lots of things to do; in Anaheim there is one thing to do. Anaheim is a name that belongs in the minor leagues, alongside the names with which it is teamed in the famous recurring Mel Blanc bit from the Jack Benny show: "Anaheim, Azusa, and Cuc...amonga". It has no business standing alongside New York, Philadelphia, Chicago — or Pittsburgh and St. Louis; it is simply not worthy of a major league. The Rams knew this. Even the LA Kiss of the Arena Football League knew this! And the Angels knew this, as well, until the city bribed the team to include its name in the team's name. That mistake was rectified as soon as possible under the new ownership. The best name is California Angels. And please note that being the California Angels does not imply that it's the only team in the state. If two teams can have the exact same geographical marker without either one claiming to be the only team in that geographical area, then one team can certainly have a city name while the other has a state name. California Angels is the name that flows nicest, and that makes the most sense. Also, it's the name of the team when it had its most beautiful look. And the name has historical weight, as it is the name under which the team won its first titles (two of those times falling heartbreakingly short of the pennant that Gene Mauch would never win). It is the name of the team of Nolan Ryan, Frank Tanana, Don Baylor, Reggie Jackson, and Rod Carew. California Angels is by far the superior choice.

Ah! I thought that Long Beach was part of the Town of Hempstead and that Glen Cove was part of the Town of Oyster Bay. Thanks for the correction, which taught me something.

Seven-inning games have no effect on the integrity of the game. Doubleheaders of seven-inning games have been played in the minor leagues for many decades, and every Major League player would have experienced them. What these games can do is to affect the stats by making a complete game more likely; but that issue can be remedied by a definitional change. Let us recall that the definition of a no-hitter was tightened up after the Andy Hawkins comedy of 1990, so as to exclude rain-shortened games (David Palmer) or efforts of more than nine innings in which the pitcher ultimately gave up a hit in extra innings (Harvey Haddix) or efforts in which the pitcher didn't start the game (Ernie Shore). Before the 1990 change, all three of the pitchers named in parentheses typically appeared in the list of all-time no-hitters, but with asterisks and footnotes to explain their unusual circumstances. A no-hitter is now defined as requiring at least nine innings; likewise a complete game could conceivably be so redefined, in order to prevent the (very mild) potential distortion effect of seven-inning games. Problem solved. If you want to see threats to the integrity of the game, look no further than some recent rule changes. The rule about the automatic intentional walk removes the possibility both of wild pitches and of the hitter swinging at pitches that come too close to the plate, not to mention the possibility of the pitcher deceiving the hitter in the manner of Rollie Fingers against Johnny Bench. The rule requiring relievers to face at least three batters and the rule limiting the use of non-pitchers on the mound remove the power of a manager to deploy his players the way he sees fit. These moves are all intended to speed up games; but, the cost is too great. And far, far worse than all of these is the runner on second base in extra innings, which represents a a huge crack in the integrity of the game. The idea that a runner can score, even though there is no justification for that runner having gotten on base, does violence to the game. This should make anyone who has ever kept a scorecard absolutely sick.

Given the strong Long Island identity and fanbase in their history, I always thought the "New York" in the name was for New York State, not New York City. I mean, their logo lops the outer boroughs (Queens and Brooklyn) off of the Island, ditching the City. Uniondale is located in the Town of Hempstead, which is one of the three towns that make up Nassau County (the other two being North Hempstead and Oyster Bay). Within the Town of Hempstead there is a Village of Hempstead that is adjacent to Uniondale. In practice, a reference to "Hempstead" (unmodified) usually refers to the village. And the supposition that the "New York" bit in the Islanders' name indicates the state makes a lot of sense. I thought that for a long time. But the historical fact is that the name was chosen in order to reflect the metropolitan area, so as to maximise the team's value and its television appeal around North America. But I am pleased that you know that the parts of New York City that lie on geographical Long Island are not included in the Islanders' logo. And here we have to say "geographical Long Island", because a reference to "Long Island" (unmodified) denotes Nassau and Suffolk Counties. This was not always the case; the default meaning of "Long Island" had been geographical for most of American history, hence the Battle of Long Island, fought in Brooklyn during the war for independence. This meaning lingered even after Brooklyn and Queens became part of New York City in 1898, as can be seen in Long Island University, which was founded in Brooklyn in the 1920s. Through as late as the 1950s, Queens locations tended to be referred to as "Jamaica, Long Island", and so forth. That usage died out by the mid-1960s, by which time the default meaning of "Long Island" had shifted from the geographical to the socio-political, and the term came to be defined in contradistinction to New York City. So when the Islanders debuted in 1972 with a logo depicting Long Island, that depiction naturally showed only Nassau and Suffolk Counties. Anaheim looks like it would be a pain to pronounce in Spanish. "ah-nah-EH-eem"? In my experience, people talking in Spanish refer to the team as the Serafines. This is also reflected in the team's website: "Anaheim Stadium ha sido la casa de los Serafines desde que se mudaron desde Los Ángeles después de la temporada del 1965." I absolutely love the observation about the pronunciation of "Anaheim"! The letter H is mute in Spanish; so the word "Anaheim" appears to have three vowels in a row, creating a rather formidible pronunciation challenge.

Even without the tentacle and the eye that tie the logo to the nickname Kraken, it would still be a strong blackletter S, and would be compatible with a very broad range of nicknames.

This does not follow. This S logo (without the eye) would go with any nickname, and would be particularly suited for a dignified nickname such as Emeralds. Likewise, the Detroit Tigers' D logo(s) would have come about in the same form even if the team had been called the Detroit Eagles or the Detroit Bears. Also, the NY logo of the New York baseball Giants transitioned seamlessly to the Mets. I agree that the excellent S logo offsets the bad name, and redeems the team's whole identity package. But there is no support for the assumption that this beautiful letter logo could have been created only alongside that one nickname, and could not have been paired with a better one.

I use imgbb. The site makes copying the direct link of an uploaded image very easy.

Carew yes; but Ryan no. Ryan is definitely more strongly associated as a player with the Angels than with his other three teams. It's with the Angels that he became a superstar, broke Koufax's strikeout record, and threw four no-hitters. His latter-day stint with the Rangers is fondly remembered because he was still performing at a very high level at an advanced age, throwing two more no hitters in his forties, and topping off his amazing career totals. Also, he went into that team's front office, and still maintains an association with the team. But we should remember that he was already a legend when he came to the Rangers, on the strength of what he had done mainly with the Angels, and secondarily with the Astros. As a player, Nolan Ryan will always be first and foremost a California Angel.

There's nothing wrong with having a second and third team. You can continue to like both the Canucks and the Kings, with the condition that you root for Seattle first. Before I retired from active baseball fandom, I rooted for the Yankees. But the A's, who in my formative years had been so entertaining, so well dressed, and so gloriously mustachioed, were my second team. Then when the Blue Jays came out, their logo and their lettering were just so beautiful (not to mention that they had the good sense to employ the mighty Richard Aldo Cerone); so I took to them, as well. Finally, my love of New York baseball history drew me to the Giants as the team to root for in the National League. For years I alternated amongst the caps of those four teams, and no other caps. The only restriction was that I would not wear the A's cap or the Blue Jays cap on days that those teams were playing the Yankees. Well, one day in around 1989, I slipped up. I left my apartment wearing my A's cap, and realised only upon arrival at the subway that the Yankees and A's were about to begin a series. So I walked back home and changed my cap, and accepted being late for work that day. Anyway, as long as you can keep the schedule straight, you can manage rooting for secondary teams alongside your top team, even if they are in the same division.

The closing theme to This Week in Baseball, entitled "The Gathering Crowds", is the most inspirational piece of music I have ever heard. Not only is it beautiful in its own right (oh, those timpanis!), but it is associated with great memories of baseball's golden age.