Sec19Row53

They're two cities?

It's possible to be both.

I'm really surprised that they're seemingly allowing the colors to be changed. Isn't that the point of advertising? Yeah - I get it. This is a sports logo board and its aesthetics suck. I'm not arguing that. The whole point of advertising is to be noticed -- unless they figure this change will bring more eyeballs to it and make it worthwhile.

Because they like what they get from Ripon?

But at bat is when there's minimal movement and optimal viewing.

Agreed, but it's only half of what it could be. So if you only put it on one sleeve always, it's only visible half the time, so you only get half the money. That ain't happening once they decided to break the seal.

Once advertisers know that it's designed to be that way, they probably wouldn't accept anything else.

The Cardinals even had two shots at it!!

So if it stops some casuals from buying them, it's still most people who don't care that they are inaccurate.

But we aren't most people. Most people don't care that they are inaccurate. Only us nerds aren't ignorant to that fact. Neither position is wrong, by the way.

Nope. Nothing like them.

I'm looking forward to this reveal. I'll be in Tucson on business April 16-19.

Prior to that, even.

What if the player does something that would cause the HOF to want the jersey

I remember you breaking that egg

32 teams seem to disagree.

It's been talked about in multiple places. I'm amazed you haven't heard. ProFootballTalk has reported on it repeatedly.

Have you seen thousands of those hats?

Just recalling similar changes in the past, it seemed like there was a purpose in something you might post. I just jumped on the absence of black, sort of looking for that confirmation.

Hmmm - absence of black.

The eX-FL Football Conference

What did last year's look like?

The Brewers are (rumored to be) extending beer sales past the 7th inning. I bet they recognized that they'd leave more money on the table due to faster paced games.

5 wasn't an allowed number for wide receivers in 2020. It doesn't matter that someone else was wearing it.

Your answer is in your response, you just don't see it. You are in support of what you are used to. Beyond being used to it, it offers value in that, when you ARE used to it, you know the position of the player based on the number. Hey, 53 is covering 80. That's a mismatch. I get that not everyone does that, just like not everyone uses TV numbers to ID players. Because any one of us don't make use of a tool isn't a good enough reason to be opposed to it.