Jungle Jim

  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

775 Starter

Profile Information

  • Gender

Recent Profile Visitors

11,413 profile views
  1. I've heard nothing but crickets. I guess we'll just have to be content with winning baseball.
  2. I haven't worn a 59Fifty in over twenty years. I feel like I look like this when I put one on:
  3. After seeing these on the field tonight, I agree completely, but just with this set. By no means should they ever change the helmet full-time, but it would be a simple and very effective improvement to this particular set.
  4. If only there was some way that the franchise could perform research on these types of things. It would have been handy if someone had brought some photos or old yearbooks over from Riverfront before they blew it up. Or maybe get a subscription to the Internets and try to find some pictures of the actual jerseys on there.
  5. Case in point: Two years ago the Reds' Scooter Gennett became the first player in five years and the 17th player in major league history to hit four home runs in a single game. It will forever be immortalized as...
  6. It matters because that's not how the team looked in 1976, and pairing high pants and socks to the knees with what are supposed to be period-correct uniforms looks...well...dumb. That being said, my frustration is directed more at players who change their from their normal pants to higher pants and longer socks when the team wears throwbacks, when they don't wear them that way the rest of the time. It's as if the throwbacks are their cue to break out the short pants and long socks, when it's not even correct for the period. DeSclafani and Aquino provide just two examples of what is a league-wide thing. It's not about what's comfortable, at least for many. It's about their trying to look the part and having no clue.
  7. In all the years of the Reds throwing back to the 70s, they have never gotten the collar right. And don't even get me started on the socks. Why do today's players automatically assume that players wore their pants up to their knees in the past? Can the team just not lay out the correct pants and stirrups for the players to wear? I have no idea what the hell Aquino was doing with his socks. There may have been others, but he was the one I saw online tonight.
  8. I've always thought they should have given a nod to their history dating back to the early 1960s and used that cap from the beginning of the current uniforms. The red "A" on a red cap has never looked right to me. It just doesn't pop enough.
  9. Since we're on the subject of Reds uniforms from the 1970s, the dry cleaners that cleaned the team's jerseys put them on prominent display. It was located on Queen City Avenue in the South Fairmount neighborhood of Cincinnati. Little did anyone know that those double-knits on those hangers would be worth thousands someday.
  10. They were an absolute sight to behold on TV today. But yes, the names were always WAY TOO BIG. Reduce that font, go with the rest, and never look back.
  11. I flipped over to the game tonight just to see the uniforms on the field, and was pleasantly surprised. They look great! I'd really like to have seen the jet logo they used on the previous green helmets, though. I understand why they did what they did, but the other one would have been so much better, especially with those points on the jersey and pants.
  12. The worst thing (among multiple things) about the uniforms is the white side panels, but I agree that the the reversed stripes do not get enough negative attention. Worse yet, they flip-flop them on the same jersey. As you said stripes should always be black on an orange background. And that lower striping pattern, right above the Nike logo, is ugly. They could use a combination of screen-printing (or whatever that is) and fabric to simulate orange sections in the jersey that have black tiger stripes, like what they had '81 to '03. Don't present it as a "black sleeve" or an "orange sleeve" like it is now.
  13. Which is what they did 1968-71, and those are coming up next. Fingers crossed that the positive feedback from the red and white uniforms (with no black or navy) will be loud enough that the team will make that switch back very soon. They can still sell merchandise with black in it, even as the predominate color. They did so prior to the addition of black to the uniforms in 1999. I've got a couple Starter jackets from the early 90s with black trim on them, and you can slap any logo on a black cap, polo, or hoodie, even if there's no black in the team's uniform. I'm not buying retail sales as a reason that black has to be kept in the uniform, as some have claimed.
  14. Why do today's players wear their pants legs up so high when the teams wear throwbacks. Are they trying to seem authentic and fit in with the period? If so, they are failing. Do they not realize that players did not wear their pants that high in the 1970s?
  15. Thank you. I have always thought that baseball jerseys and pants should be the same color, even if that means maroon (Phillies, Indians), orange (Orioles), yellow (Pirates), black (Pirates), mustard (Padres), green (A's), or whatever color from neck to calf. The alternates over white/gray pants have been with us since the 1970s, but I'll never get used to them. Just a really bad look, and the names that have been given them (softball tops, Little League jerseys, batting practice jerseys, Spring Training jerseys) are all appropriate.