BBTV

Since we brought up Charles Barkley, here's one that I'm sure was posted but I'll post again. CB in the wrong uniform (I associate him with the late '80s blue block letter set) and wrong number (he selfishly took Billy Cunningham's #32 to "honor" Magic Johnson who got HIV because he was dumb.) When these were unveiled he said that it looked like his little daughter got her hands on a box of crayons and went nuts and that he hated them.

Yes, I think the Suns did a throwback during the Barkley era to the original uniforms which had been used all the way up to just before Barkley joined Phoenix. I think they may have worn those in preseason that year and busted out the new ones for the regular season...but I may be making that up I don't think you're making it up - I also remember the Suns wearing the old unforms in pre-season that year and not using the new ones until the regular season started. Also wasn't that their first season in America West (or whatever it's called now) arena? I'm pretty sure that's the case. The Suns even wore these in an episode of "Hangin' with Mr. Cooper". That's exactly what happened. I used to love those old Suns uniforms (but now see how dated they look - they could be updated and look amazing though) and was confused when I watch them play in the pre season despite the new jersey "leaked" in an Eastbay (or similar) catalog.

You sure he played for them? I've never heard this, and the stats don't show up on Basketball Reference.

I wonder when the stirrup really first started getting pulled up high. We all know that the original intent of stirrups was to look like a sock while allowing for a sani to be worn around the feet, so the decision to pull them up was one purely against the original baseball aesthetic.

I wear my pants high, but my problem is that because my legs are dis-proportionately short for my body, my Nike size S pants are way too long, so when I blouse them up, there's a whooooole lot of rolling that takes place, which basically creates a tourniquet-effect just below my knee.

In "competitive" softball leagues, pants are pretty much a requirement, due to the enforcement of sliding rules and the need to slide. In rec or co-ed leagues, I find that it doesn't really matter since people don't always go all-out and slide unless it's 100% necessary.

I was with a girl who had been black maled before. God was she disappointed when she saw what I was working with.

Actually, a disaster that destroys the Jobberdome might be the best thing that could happen to that city. The team has nowhere to play, the league will be forced to sell them, the city would collect on some type of insurance (then use the money to make a parking lot), and their budget deficit would be reduced by $25M.

Just curious - when a major arena is built in a suburb (like Landover MD, Glendale, Pontiac, etc.), does the anchor city contribute anything since its name generally gets associated with the team and they probably benefit from hotel taxes, or is it the suburb who assumes all the risk for the project? Or would each case be totally different?

The thing is, this isn't really a "few years" type thing - they're going to go through this next year, then the year after that, etc. etc. They need to have a contingency plan ready to go at each year-end - they don't have the luxury of counting on the Coyotes being in the suburban mall for a "few" more years. So I'm confused with the conflicting reports. Where does this stand right now? I read that the Glendopes agreed to pay the 5M, but then that other article hinted that they were leaving. What's the deal here?

The Rock is built like that... Open concourse with a direct view of the ice from anywhere... Is it really? I just googled a few articles and read that one end of the mezzanine is open, providing a "baseball park-like view", but I didn't realize that the entire thing was open.

Holy crap that sounds sweet. I have been CitBank Park (people call it that, right?), but that sounds amazing. No. You're passion and fury is certainly understandable, it's just that you're placing far to much value on on-ice success. I'm one who thinks that it makes the league more "legit" to have successful franchises in big market cities, however it's simply not possible to argue rationally in favor of the city continuing to do what they're doing to keep a team that is just not set up in a way to ever re-pay the citizens for their investment. In a different time, with a different business plan, maybe Phoenix could work - but the whole Glendale deal has simply made it impossible at this point.

My favorite feature of Citizens Bank Park is the 360 concourse with full view of the action from anywhere. I never even thought about something like that being built into an indoor arena like that. That's f'ing fantastic, and will make most if not all of the indoor arenas built in the past 20 years obsolete in due time.

Probably because you'd only be able to see the opposite end of the ice due to the location of the rink and the pitch of the stands. There's "limited" view, and then there's "really f'ing limited" view. Those would likely fall into the latter category.

Why does dying or injury supercede actually being good? I say treat them all the same. If they "honor" the great players, then "honor" the dead ones too. The Flyers are the opposite (sort of.) When Pelle Lindberg died, they immediately pulled his number from circulation, and it has remained that way for 27ish years now. They will not retire it though (probably because he was DUI when his car crashed, but still.) The Eagles retired Jerome Brown's 99 when he too was killed in a car crash while driving recklessly on a wet road. He was an all-pro player and arguably the best DT in the game, but had he simply retired at that moment I don't think he'd have qualified for such an honor.

When a significant player leaves, just hold his number out of circulation for a while until clear heads can decide if it should be retired or not. Just saying HOF is kind of dumb because there are players who play a significant role in their franchise's history for reasons other than HOF caliber play that should be considered, and there are guys who weren't considered worthy of retirement who happen to make their respective HOFs decades later, creating the mess of teams retiring the same number for multiple players, or retiring a number that had been worn by 12 other players since the one who "retired" it was done with it. The Eagles have several numbers out of circulation - Randall Cunningham's 12 (some pre-season QB had it years ago and it was taken away after the first practice, and this year Steve Smith wanted it because it was his old Giants number but the team said it was off limits), Brian Dawkins 20 (the owner said that no player would ever wear it again because of what he meant to the team and the fans... but stopped short of saying it'd be actually "retired"), and Brian Westbrook's 36 (Ronnie Brown wore it in pre-season because not enough other numbers were available, but then was told to switch after the final cuts.) I doubt McNabb's 5 will be issued any time soon, despite the team's and fanbase's disdain for him. It's a crime that they would hold his number out but then give Ron Jawarski's 7 out to a kicker, punter, 3rd string QBs, and now Michael Vick. I don't think either should be retired, but if 5 is than 7 should be too.

It's all up to the teams. You'll find that a lot of newer teams will seemingly retire the first number of any halfway good player that played with them just so they can try to establish a history or have an event out of it. I know for the Phillies the requirement is HOF, which is why Jim Bunning's #14 was retired decades after he last played (and after several other players, notably Pete Rose wore it) when he was elected by the Veterans' Committee. I believe the Flyers have the same requirement, which is why Mark Howe's #2 was just retired. I think it's kind of dumb to retire a number after it's been worn by other players, but that's what they do.

I couldn't disagree more. Let the teams that these guys play on retire their numbers, but allow other players on other teams who may grow up idolizing these guys to "honor" them (which I think is ridiculous, but I know I'm in the minority there) by wearing their numbers if they so choose to. I have no problem with league-wide jackie Robinson tributes or memorials, because it's a story that needs to be known by everybody, but I don't like seeing #42 hanging next to Mike Schmidt's, Steve Carlton's, Richie Ashburn's, and Robin Robert's numbers.

Tickets for the Islanders-Devils exhibition game went on sale today - here's the seating map on the ticket page: I still can't believe they built an arena in New York City metro too small to accommodate every type of event that utilizes arenas. I don't just mean hockey either. Now you have fewer seats for concerts, you don't have room for motocross or monster trucks or the circus. Not that monster trucks are a big draw in New York, but why not leave open the possibility? It seems so stupidly shortsighted. Three words: Madison. Square. Garden. Between the Knicks, Rangers, and the other events held at MSG, there would be no open dates for another team to play. Also, I doubt the Isles would want to play on Rangers logo'd ice, and the Rangers certainly wouldn't change it. But it doesn't matter anyway, because of the first thing. Also, would the Islanders crowd (what's left of it) go into Manhattan for games?

Can people stop posting just photos without any description please? Not everyone knows who the hell some guy on your favorite team is.

Looks like the Flyers changed their retired number banners when they retired Mark Howe's number a couple of weeks ago. I liked the old ones better because they emphasized the number, which despite how clear it is in my picture, isn't that noticeable from the other side of the arena or the upper level.

make the FDLs smaller and more of them, like the Sens laurel from the pre-edge alt.

I thought a stylized FDL would work well as a primary crest for a Quebec team (though I like it as a trim aspect as well.)

Sorry if it's been mentioned, but does Seattle have an arena that's viable even as a 1 or 2 year holdover until they can build a new one? Actually, is that plan still even moving forward?

That logo never looked right on the silver patch. Still one of the all-time great marks though.