Seeing red in Washington...

[tohasbo]

Keep in mind that this is what it was supposed to be before they added the new interlocking DC logo.

[LuvTheNats]

I am a die hard Nats fan and the theory around here is that the Nats are utilizing the "DC" stuff because of possible name change. Talk is that the new owners (when named) might change the name of the team from Nationals to something else, possibly Senators. That might explain why we have seen an insurgance of patches that omit the name "Nationals". Just a thought.

[jab8281965]

Connie Mack wore a freaking three piece suit on the bench. Even if it was a rule back then, I didn't see anyone complaining that Mr. Mack wore a suit.

Can anyone cite a rule that states that all managers must be in uniform (which includes a jersey?).

[Blackjack76]

And anyone with access to the MLB Style Guide would notice that the sleeve patch on the pics above is NOT the sleeve patch on the Nationals' style guide.

Actually, that patch isn't even like the sleeve patches on the regular jerseys (which have red in the center and "Washington Nationals" written around the DC logo).

This certainly gives some support to the anti-Nationals movement going on in the District.

[Gothamite]

Assuming he's breaking some manager-in-uniform rule, who exactly is going to be the umpire who tells Frank Robinson to change his shirt? Even if you put aside the whole living legend, Hall of Famer, black sporting pioneer, one of the greatest ballplayers of all time thing, and even if you also put aside the fact that he's like 103 years old and you're supposed to cut old folks a little slack, and even if you further put aside his Presidential Medal of Freedom, there's the fact that until a couple of years ago he was boss of the umpires. That's a lot of stuff to put aside just to tell an old man to change his shirt.

Every umpire should tell him to change his shirt, if it violates the rules. It doesn't matter if he runs the league, umpires, bat boys, peanut vendors, whatever. He is not above the game, nor should he use his position to intimidate or influence any umpires. And I think that was proven by his many ejections last season.

That's not to say that Robinson does any of those things, it's just a list of examples. I haven't read anything or seen anything to warrant feelings of Robinson being above the game.

Agreed. Rules are rules, no matter who's breaking them.

[BallWonk]

I am a die hard Nats fan and the theory around here is that the Nats are utilizing the "DC" stuff because of possible name change.  Talk is that the new owners (when named) might change the name of the team from Nationals to something else, possibly Senators.  That might explain why we have seen an insurgance of patches that omit the name "Nationals". Just a thought.

I agree with the theory. Switching to the new DC patch makes sense as part of a three-year plan to ease the team into a new name. The new name would debut in 2008, so it would be public knowledge (or the likelihood of the change would be known, if not the actual new name) throughout the 2007 season. The last thing new owners would want is to spend their first full season trying to sell merchandise that says Nationals when everyone knows that gear with the new name will be available in time for Christmas anyway. But if the team substitutes the DC logo for Nationals wherever possible, then its 2007 merchandise won't be prematurely obsolete.

Bud Selig confirmed to me (my one actual reporting scoop ever) in 2004 that the new owners will have the opportunity to rename the team. I got the strong impression that he wants the owners to change the name to Senators, because Bud is a dope who is obsessed with nostalgia for the year 1957, but he says the matter will be left entirely to the new owners.

I'm not the biggest fan of the name "Nationals," if for no other reason than it shortens to "Nats" which makes it impossible to shout down the traitorous New York fans who show up at RFK with their "Let's Go Mets" chant. ("Let's Go Nats" doesn't work for that purpose, and the two-note "Dee-Cee" hasn't caught on.) But since the odds are zero that the new owners would choose any of the good team names available -- Grays, Monuments, Federals, Potomacs, and so forth -- instead of Senators, which commemorates nothing more than suckiness and betrayal, I'm hoping there's no name change.

Plus, there's a lot to be said for the Nationals name as part of branding the team as a tourist destination just off the Mall. I've already seen a number of people with the tourist-identifying Smithsonian shop bags or National Archives folders at RFK this year or on the Metro after the game, far more than I ever saw last season. That is a trend to be encouraged. No other name would reinforce that branding strategy as well as Nationals.

[tohasbo]

And anyone with access to the MLB Style Guide would notice that the sleeve patch on the pics above is NOT the sleeve patch on the Nationals' style guide.

Actually, that patch isn't even like the sleeve patches on the regular jerseys (which have red in the center and "Washington Nationals" written around the DC logo).

This certainly gives some support to the anti-Nationals movement going on in the District.

Is there going to be viewable one via internet for this year?

[SteveR]

Actually, that patch isn't even like the sleeve patches on the regular jerseys (which have red in the center and "Washington Nationals" written around the DC logo).

Actually, for 2007, this is the patch that is being used on the home whites, the road grays AND the alt reds. Same patch on all three.

[Gothamite]

Plus, there's a lot to be said for the Nationals name as part of branding the team as a tourist destination just off the Mall. I've already seen a number of people with the tourist-identifying Smithsonian shop bags or National Archives folders at RFK this year or on the Metro after the game, far more than I ever saw last season. That is a trend to be encouraged. No other name would reinforce that branding strategy as well as Nationals.

Wait, I'm not sure I follow you.

Are you saying that the Nationals are drawing tourists to games based on the team name?

[Survival79]

Actually, that patch isn't even like the sleeve patches on the regular jerseys (which have red in the center and "Washington Nationals" written around the DC logo).

Actually, for 2007, this is the patch that is being used on the home whites, the road grays AND the alt reds. Same patch on all three.

[Gothamite]

I like that patch on the home and road unis, but on the alt it looks silly. Overbranding.

[Blackjack76]

Actually, that patch isn't even like the sleeve patches on the regular jerseys (which have red in the center and "Washington Nationals" written around the DC logo).

Actually, for 2007, this is the patch that is being used on the home whites, the road grays AND the alt reds. Same patch on all three.

Interesting. That patch is not on the official team style guide. Good find.

[BallWonk]

Plus, there's a lot to be said for the Nationals name as part of branding the team as a tourist destination just off the Mall. I've already seen a number of people with the tourist-identifying Smithsonian shop bags or National Archives folders at RFK this year or on the Metro after the game, far more than I ever saw last season. That is a trend to be encouraged. No other name would reinforce that branding strategy as well as Nationals.

Wait, I'm not sure I follow you.

Are you saying that the Nationals are drawing tourists to games based on the team name?

Obviously not. That would be a very silly thing to say.

What I'm saying is that if you're going to have a branding strategy that involves making a day at the ballpark part of the normal DC tourist experience, naming the team "Nationals" fits better with your strategy than naming them, say, "RiverDawgs" or "Senators" or whatnot. If you want to sell yourself as the nation's team in the nation's capital, "Nationals" is your best possible name.

[Gothamite]

What I'm saying is that if you're going to have a branding strategy that involves making a day at the ballpark part of the normal DC tourist experience, naming the team "Nationals" fits better with your strategy than naming them, say, "RiverDawgs" or "Senators" or whatnot.

I don't think that's a very good strategy.

Marketing to tourists? As a substantial part of your base?

[cappital92]

What I'm saying is that if you're going to have a branding strategy that involves making a day at the ballpark part of the normal DC tourist experience, naming the team "Nationals" fits better with your strategy than naming them, say, "RiverDawgs" or "Senators" or whatnot.

I don't think that's a very good strategy.

Marketing to tourists? As a substantial part of your base?

It puts butts in seats.

[CS85]

Like the Jersey, but would've looked a lot better with an alt cap.

[BBTV]

Did the grey jerseys have front numbers last season? They would look better without.

[BBM]

The name Nationals works for two reasons:

1. This was the OFFICIAL name of the old Washington team that moved to Minnesota, until the late 1950s. Everyone called them the Senators, but the official name was Nationals.

2. They're in the NATIONAL league. The other two DC teams were AL. It just wroks.

[Bouj]

I don't have a picture, but I noticed that Frank Robinson was wearing a jersey. Whenever I've seen him manage, he's always worn a jacket. Anyone know why he's just wearing a jersey?

He wore the jersey last weekend in Houston. Probably one of those things where he wears the jersey only when he feels like it.

And lots of times starting pitchers who have the day off won't wear their jerseys. They'll go to the jacket or warm-up top or fleece or whatever. Roger Clemens had to go get his jersey (and spikes) out of his locker during the 18-inning game last year in the playoffs so he could pitch.

[conesbeans]

Wow, that's a lot of talk back-and-forth about managers not wearing jerseys! But you know what? I'm gonna add to it!

First of all, has anyone considered the fact that the managers mentioned might be wearing jerseys UNDER the jackets and pullovers?

Secondly, a little story (you like stories, don't you?):

I used to work for a guy who had a belly like he just swallowed a medicine ball. He always wore a satin baseball jacket IN the office, and in the summer time, the office was FREEZING. With teeth chattering, I went to the boss (who had dictatorial control of the thermostat) and asked him why he had to make the office so cold, and he told me it was because he wore that jacket. So I asked the next logical question, which was why he wore the jacket, and he answered, "Because I'm fat."

Well, I couldn't argue with that, so I smiled, walked back to my office and accepted freezing for the rest of my tenure there (he was a good boss -- best I ever had).

My point? It has been a long time since most managers took care of their bodies (guys like Mike Scioscia, who was never svelt to begin with, are looking more jolly with each passing Twinkie), and I have a feeling they're just trying to do a little belly-hiding.

Don'tcha think?