Ferdinand Cesarano

Because I am comfortable with being a blowhard, I am not bothered if someone thinks my account is wanky. The important thing is that it is completely accurate. You're just going to drop that in there partway through your manifesto? I also think swapping wives and subsequently families is something that is going to get some level of mocking and questioning. The two of them were also the ones that made it public in the first place. Surely you don't think that my post should have been even longer! I originally had some sentences there elaborating on the matter, but I took them out so as to stick to the main point. Believe it or not, what you got was the short version! Anyway, Peterson and Kekich made their arrangment public only because they knew that it was going to be written about. And it deserves no mocking, as everyone involved was doing it willingly. First of all, the Yankee fans of my era were far from "joyless". We took great pleasure in our vast knowledge; even better, we used it to educate anyone who asked (and sometimes people who didn't ask). Secondly, the Francesa-type fan is representative of the latter-day boor, not of the 1970s-era erudite baseball scholar. On more substantive matters: That uncharacteristic move was noted. Logic fail. It does not follow at all that, because the Yankees have done one misstep that harms their otherwise-classic uniforms, they should therefore do more such things. I do not minimise the abomination of an ad patch on the Yankees' uniforms. Indeed, that team deserves more criticism over the advertisement than does any other team, precisely because of the team's other good stances. But having made that error, the Yankees should definitely not give up on everything that makes their uniforms great, namely, having only white at home and grey on the road, having one cap, and having no player names. This, too, is a valid critique. Yet to follow this critique with the assertion that they should do more of that sort of thing is incoherent. The one thing that should not be off the table is the one thing that the Yankees have almost never done: throwbacks. (They did it once at Fenway Park.) While delving into their own history would produce uniforms that are either very similar to their current uniform or are not interesting (such as the blank pinstripe jersey from the 1920s), they could do what the Royals do and wear Negro League uniforms. The Black Yankees are best known for using this uniform: Ebbets Field Flannels already sells the jersey.

Yeah, bent up your own ass, what a stupid post Says the guy who's too young to know better. When I started watching baseball and became a Yankee fan, it was the early 1970s, and being a Yankee fan was definitely not cool. The glow of the Mets' 1969 World Championship was still everywhere; and this was only exacerbated by the team's late-season comeback in 1973 to win the division and win another pennant, before taking the mighty Oakland A's to seven games in that year's World Series. At that time, the Yankees were strictly passé. They were the team best known for hyping guys who turned out to be disappointments, guys such as Rusty Torres and Frank Tepedino. Even the supposed superstar, Bobby Murcer, who was indeed a quality player, was not the generational talent that the team had been touting, and would never equal his one great season. The lone actual star on that team, Thurman Munson, had yet to blossom, while the consistent and underrated Roy White was most often overlooked. The Mets were dazzling with their stellar starting rotation of Tom Seaver, Jerry Koosman, and later Jon Matlack; by contrast, the Yankees were trudging along with a fading Mel Stottlemyre, together with an inconsistent Fritz Peterson and the occasionally brilliant Mike Kekich (the latter two of whom were involved in a phony "scandal" when aspects of their private lives were reported on and unjustly mocked). In this environment, the Met fans were the know-nothing trend-followers, and we Yankee fans were, yes, the scholars. We were the ones who were actually familiar with the players and the teams from both leagues. When the Mets would acquire a new player, the Met fans at my school would have to ask us — the Yankee fans, and therefore the serious baseball fans — about that player. When a Met fan was about to go to a game, that Met fan would ask us for a rundown of the opposition. For we were the Yankee fans, the keepers of the knowledge. Then the Lean Years ended, and we Yankee fans got our championship teams. Still, immediately thereafter, we were knocked down again by having no World Championships in the entire 1980s, during which time the Mets once again became the media darlings — and, therefore, once again became the go-to team for the empty-headed know-nothings. And so for a second time, now as an adult, I had the experience of my Met-fan friends asking me for information on new acquisitions, on call-ups, and on opposing players. I retired from following current baseball after 1996, when the Yankees were nice enough to play me out with a championship. So I watched the Yankees' resurgence after that as an outsider. And what became clear to me was that the nature of Yankee fans had altered radically. While Yankee fans of my generation were arrogantly haughty, the Yankee fans of the latter generation were just loutish. In the 1970s, Yankee fans would cheer for many great opposing players. Amongst the opposing players who always got great receptions at Yankee Stadium were Brooks Robinson, Andre Thornton, and Rod Carew. This recalls the stories of Dodger fans at Ebbets Field always cheering for Stan Musial. The character of Yankee fans of my generation can be illustrated by two events involving Tom Seaver. First, after Seaver was traded from the Mets in June of 1977, his first appearance in New York came a few weeks later at the All-Star Game at Yankee Stadium. His introduction before the game elicited the biggest ovation of the night, bigger than that for the several Yankee players in the game, or for Yankee manager Billy Martin, who was managing the American League. The second event came in August of 1985, when Seaver faced the Yankees at the Stadium going for his 300th career victory. During that game, something remarkable happened: the crowd turned. This had happened for individual moments, for instance, when Reggie Jackson made his first appearance back at the Stadium after signing with the Angels, and was cheered for homering against Ron Guidry. But for the first and only time in history, an entire packed Yankee Stadium turned for the whole game, rooting against the Yankees as they cheered for Seaver. After Seaver got his complete-game victory, the capacity crowd stood and roared, and demanded a curtain call. This is what my kind of Yankee fandom had been about. Seaver, unlike Jackson, was not a former Yankee. Rather, he was a former Met. Yet Yankee fans, being at that time the epitome of great and knowledgeable baseball fans, ignored petty partisanship to pay appropriate respect to greatness. There is a profound difference between the Yankee fans of my day and those of the current day. If the Seaver scenarios had played out at any time after 2000, the Yankee fans of today would certainly have booed a longtime Met, rather than cheer a baseball hero.

While I like some of the City Connect designs (the Angels, the Diamondbacks, and, despite myself, the White Sox), it feels very good to know that a team is just refusing to participate in that. I grew up a Yankee fan, but I no longer identify as one, because Yankee fans in my day had a scholarly bent, while today's Yankee fans tend toward the stupid and goonish. But I continue to admire the fact that the Yankees do so much right in the realm of uniforms. One home uniform (white); one road uniform (grey); no coloured jerseys; no player names; one cap; and now no City Connect uniform to go with having had no Turn Ahead the Clock uniform. In light of this excellent record, it's a pity that they succumbed to the uniform advertisement. (I suppose that one could also cite the Nike swoosh, but the team didn't really have a choice on that.)

I completely disagree. I can't stand ties. You play the game to determine a winner. To not do so is the definition of a failure. I hate that the NFL has ties and think that they should give refunds on tickets to those that attend one. You play the season to determine a champion. In order to do that, every single game does not need a winner. This is truest of all in the sport with the most games in its season. Even though I no longer have time to follow soccer, as I did for about fifteen years, the one piece of wisdom that I retain from that experience is an understanding of the validity of a draw. Overtime should be strictly for playoffs in all sports.

Not only is UFL a poor name in its own right, but it's a significant step down from one of the existing names, the USFL. The USFL name has tremendous recognition, and enjoys overwhelmingly positive associations. To just toss away this brand equity is to create a new problem where one did not previously exist. The 2024 season should rightfully be presented as the third season of the current version of the USFL, and the league's sixth season overall. If they can get a TV deal in Canada, then it could be: Liaison of Inter-National Television; League of American Football, or . . . LINT LOAF.

Who owns the AAF's IP? It would be nice if a purchase of the name "Orlando Apollos" could have been arranged. (Even if not for use right now, but maybe for a year or two down the line, if things go well.)

I am always in favour of independent leagues. So my first reaction was: good for this team for starting up. But a home run derby to decide games is absolutely embarrassing. Indeed, I thought that the post mentioning that was a joke mocking the league. To know that this is really the rule is nothing short of shocking. How any baseball fan could approve of this is far, far beyond my understanding. I'm not fundamentally against alterations of the rules, even radical ones. But this is bad. If they wanted to take something good from soccer, then they should have borrowed the acknowledgement that a draw is a legitimate result. A regular-season game tied after nine innings should go into the books as a draw; save the extra innings for playoff games that have to have a winner. This is a case where the flaw is so big that it overshadows everything else. Very disappointing.

The Connie Mack statue is still there.

It was an excellent game, which I heard on the radio. (I prefer listening on radio; I do that for Super Bowls, also. Listening also spares me from seeing the horrible monochrome uniforms that so many teams are using, such as Montreal in this game.) I will admit that I am pretty disappointed that Toronto didn't make the Grey Cup, as that team had the "team of destiny" feel all season, with quarterback Chad Kelly (nephew of Jim Kelly) winning the MOP award, and running back A.J. Ouellette (who is almost as small as Joe Morris) enjoying a breakout season with more than 1000 rushing yards. The Argos' decisive loss to Montreal last week was unfortunate. Still, Montreal's comeback in the Grey Cup game was thrilling.

Very nice. The piping is beautiful. If the only versions of this uniform were the two on the right, this would be an even better set. And if the road grey had a front number (preferably in contrasting colours) and if it used the same hat as the home uniform, then this set would be just about perfect.

Yes, I guess that's a good point, as it pertains not only to New York, but also to California and Maryland.

They are Egad. Terrible.

I hope that the PLL doesn't try to make "New York" stand for the state, a move not seen since the World Team Tennis team the New York Buzz, which played in varous upstate locales including Albany. Still, I'd love to see the Lizards return. If the Atlas do settle upstate, and the Lizards come back in the New York City / Long Island area, then I hope the league realises that Albany Atlas is a better name.

I'm a homer when it comes to sports. I supported the Bayhawks in MLL because they were the team closest to home, but that name sucked. A ripoff of the Seattle Seahawks branding. Well, it's true that Bayhawks as a name is inherently kind of cheesy. So is Seahawks! But the name acquired gravitas with all those championships. And the logo is outstanding. The Bayhawks were champions six times! For this league to have the ability to use that historically significant name with only positive associations, yet to choose not to use it in favour of the name of a new team that has won one championship, this is extremely hard to understand. I disagree with that. The simplified bull is much more attractive than the previous busier version. The look of the Atlas's logos is pretty good. The roundel is excellent, and the NY that makes use of the bull horns is clever (even if the connection between a bull and the Greek god Atlas is a bit of a mystery). On the other hand, a singular name is always amateurish. We had the Orlando Apollos; we could have had the New York Atlases. Also, it's worth emphasising the foolishness of leaving unused yet another great and beloved identity, that of the Lizards. And in this case, unlike that of the Bayhawks, it's a great name in its own right, as well as being an identity that acquired tremendous meaning on account of a great history.

The Jets' regular uniforms are not "extremely similar" to their throwbacks! The current uniform is the worst one in their history, while the throwback uniform is the best one. The current uniform's flaws are numerous and serious. First, the current helmet logo is absolutely nothing. It has none of the personality of the (admittedly flawed) one that it replaced, the original logo that was brought back in the late 1990s. And it has none of the style of the throwback helmet logo, the wordmark with the jet tail. Second, the current uniform includes both a black jersey and black pants. Completely inappropriate. Third, the "New York" on the front of the jersey is comical. It shouldn't be there at all; but, if it's going to be there, it should be about a quarter of the size. Finally, the swooshes that come in from the sleeve are not sleeve stripes. They're trash derived from that Denver Broncos uniform that was the superspreader event for bad design. If you want a uniform that is similar to this: ...then you would have to cite this: ...with the black outline on the numbers, the stripes, and the helmet logo, and the use of green pants with the white jersey. That's a significant downgrade from the team's best look, but it is definitely similar. Whereas, the current look is nowhere near the best look.

Yes, but then the Kats came back a few years later, in one of those cheesy Cleveland Browns deals that spits in the eye of history, and were in the league alongside the Force.

If the league now has access to the old MLL names, then it's baffling why the New York Lizards' name and excellent logo were not revived. Almost as bad is overlooking the Bayhawks. These names are synonymous with pro lacrosse, having had a Yankees / Red Sox - style rivalry in the MLL. Those complaints aside, I am pleased to see the return of a nice old UFL name, the California Redwoods.

With the Dragons not being in the league, it seems silly to do a big press event in New York. Better to do it in Philadelphia, where the league just announced the revival of the Soul.

Yeah, he's a goofball. More important, he has no journalistic responsibilities, unlike Brazil and Pratt, who work for network outlets.

Yeah, none of them are biased. Oh, stop. They are serious reporters who back up everything they report. Of course they both are angry that the team will probably move; but their reporting is undeniably credible.

Where did you see that? In every report by Brodie Brazil and Casey Pratt, and in the Oakland mayor's comments to Pratt.

The city and the team were on the verge of a deal when the team showed bad faith by blindsiding the city with an announcement of a "binding" agreement on the first Las Vegas site back in April.

I agree that Fisher is not going to sell. But his refusal to sell cannot be on account of his being a "cheapskate", as a sale would get him about $1 billion in profit as compared to his purchase price.

It's preferable to measure distance with units of distance, so I will say that I do indeed know that Rockford is about 80 or 90 miles away from Chicago, which, admittedly, is considerably more than the 40 or 50 miles that separate Santa Clara and San Francisco. Still, the point remains that naming a team after the big city in the region is unobjectionable, even if the team is located in an area that is, strictly speaking, outside the big city's recognised metropolitan area. The point is to be more attractive to advertisers, and also to have the listing look better on a TV schedule.

To be fair, the USFL calls Detroit "Philadelphia", Canton, OH "Pittsburgh" and "New Jersey", Memphis "Houston" and Birmingham "New Orleans". So... When I started to read this post, I thought that it was going to be the acknowledgement that the NFL calls Santa Clara "San Francisco", calls East Rutherford "New York", and calls Arlington "Dallas", and that it may soon be calling Naperville "Chicago". It also used to call Pontiac "Detroit", as did the NBA, which, additionally, called Richfield "Cleveland", and which at one time seemed poised to call Camden "Philadelphia". And Major League Baseball calls Anaheim "Los Angeles". Which is to say that there's nothing wrong with this. A major city has a sphere of influence that encompasses many neighbouring municipalities, so naming a team that is based in one of those smaller municipalities after the region's primary city is sensible. Please note that I am not necessarily claiming that the new AFL is not cheesy. But if it's cheesy, the reason that it's cheesy is not its naming practices.