BBTV

Depends on the font for 6. Standard block isn't too bad. It's definitely not one of my favorite QB numbers, but it's not in 2 territory. 2 is just an awkward number in any font. I don't even care that mostly lousy QBs have worn 2, I just think it's an ugly-ass QB number. Save it for the kicker.

I still contend that 2 is the worst-looking number for a quarterback to wear, and it looks really bad on a guy that looks/plays like Wentz.

As a former stadium employee, the idea sucks - both for event-staff management and personnel. I guess if you're traveling, going to have to book until Tuesday unless you know you're going to a total crap game that can't be moved.

Why would a guy with no testicles need even one jockstrap, let alone two?

I don't know anything about fabric, but I doubt it starts out crisp white, so wouldn't there be dye in either case? I know you're being funny, but it made me think.

Unretiring a number is like the honoree giving back a trophy, or withdrawing from the team's HOF or something. I get the honored players not wanting to look like the bad guy, but once a team reissues a retired number, then the honor should be officially rescinded and the player be removed from wherever the numbers are displayed. It is literally an award, and unretiring it is the same as giving back the award. It's not "retired" unless it's "retired", and if I'm a team owner that put together a big event to honor a player that mean a lot to the team, I'd feel disrespected if that player eventually was like "nah, it's cool - you can have my number back." I'm not saying Jerry Rice or Manning are buttholes or anything, but it shouldn't have even been an option for them. If Joe Montana can wear 19, then Peyton Manning could have too. At the end of the day, fewer numbers should be retired - lots of teams need higher standards. Exceptions for family and real-close relations.

Or Duane Haskins thinking he deserved Joe Theisman's number, Peyton Manning taking 18 in Denver, JJ Watt taking some dead guy's number in Arizona, Jerry Rice and Steve Largent, etc.

Wait what? He disappeared to me when he went to the Angels so I'm not sure, but wouldn't be be better known as an Expo? I absolutely dreaded when the Phillies played the Expos because he was so good there for (what felt like) so long.

Maybe the majority, but not the one that mattered:

And any player that asks a guy who’s received that honor if he can wear his number should go to hell. Since they don’t care about taking awards away from old timers, why not just ask the guy if he can send you his MVP trophies and championship rings too?

I always wondered that too, and that was one of the reasons why I came to the conclusion that if you need two pair of the same color pants to make your uniform work, you designed it wrong. Maybe they had some thought of having orange pants with navy panels to wear with the white jerseys and therefore needed the navy panel to exist? Either way, it was a poor decision. I vividly recall when they were unveiled, as I was in college at the time and despite being a big uni-nerd at the time that regularly designed concepts that used elements like piping and panels, which were at the time unheard of in football, I wanted to vomit when I saw them. Elway looked like a complete fool in the get up. It doesn't help that hundreds of college and high school programs grifted the template and have since moved on, which by no fault of their own, makes the Broncos look like the last ones to get the memo that it's not cool anymore. The uniforms clearly look better to me with navy tops - the orange has never looked right. It's well past time for a change.

One of those teams is not the Super Bowl LII Champion Philadelphia Eagles.

And the long slob shirts that create contrasting cummerbunds and sometimes even cover the player's butt. Those wouldn't have been allowed back in the day. I guess the "slope" started when they started allowing jerseys to be untucked as long as they had elastic at the bottom back in the early 00s. For a while, it wasn't always obvious if someone's jersey was tucked or not because of how they were tailored. Now, players want to look like dopes and wear t-shirts that just show off how untucked they are. "Yo, man check me out - my shirt goes down to my butt!" "Oh yeah? Well mine goes all the way down to my knees!" "Hold my beer... check this out - mine actually drapes on the ground. Can't even see my shoes!" Idiots.

I wonder if this means NHL will eventually get moved back to the main header on espn.com instead of in the "other" section near "recruiting", "F1", and "bull roping".

I don't like how they kept that version of the helmet logo either.

It's not just that sleeves are shrinking, it's that the shoulder pads have basically gone away too, so there's just no more room. All that stuff - TV number, shoulder hoop, Nike ad, and logo would have worked fine back in the day when the players had enormous pads - even with the current cap-sleeve style. Even if he had sleeves down to his elbow, it wouldn't make any difference. In fact, the only non-throwback jerseys we've seen so far that eliminate the TV number are the ones with shoulder trim, so for the majority of the league, there's simply no reason to get rid of them. Even in the Rams case, they only eliminated them in the one jersey where the shoulder trim would have matched the number. It's not inevitable, and it's not going to happen.

Once teams start dropping TV numbers without making any other changes, we'll talk. Until then, the overwhelming majority of the league will have them so they're far from RIP.

there's absolutely no reason to think that.

Love the Browns. I'm always in favor of more orange touching brown.

I can't believe I remember this, but we actually discussed that logo here like 15 years ago. Nick made a vector of it and then said the Seahawks started using it. The link in the thread isn't there anymore but here it is anyway.

they could just put little chips in the jerseys and the TV broadcast could "hover" the number over the player, or make it look like it's in a thought bubble coming out of his head. Problem solved.

Regarding full-body logos, check out this old Eagles one worn by recently-deceased Irv Cross:

0 and 00 look ridiculous, but especially in football. If they were to open up 1-9 for receivers (which I would be against), then they should just make 80s a defensive number again since no young receiver wants an 80s jersey.

I'm really glad the Eagles didn't fall into the "body around the head" trap. I can't see any way to pull that off without it being a complete train wreck of a bird. EDIT: Ad me to the list of people that never realized just how bad the crawling jaguar was (the stomach lol) but I don't care. I still love it, and those jerseys, and the original logo.

They could put mics on a literal chicken and pig and it wouldn't make a difference in Super Bowl ratings. If anything, it could help! While I hate TNF, at least I'll be able to watch it if it's on Amazon and not the dumb af NFLN. I don't really get the ABC thing - aren't they and ESPN under the same umbrella? I wouldn't have thought they'd be bidding separately for various packages.