Two different number fonts on a jersey

[DGivens87]

This is actually something I've been meaning to bring up, but just never got around to it until now.

As a nitpicker/researcher of New England Patriots jerseys, I noticed awhile ago, while looking through my football card collection, that the Pats utilized 2 different number fonts on their 1993 and 1994 jerseys.

The main font is what I call the "USC" font, currently used by the Trojan football team. These numbers are on the front and back. However, it appears there's a slight deviation from the numbers on the shoulders - take a look.

By this pic, the "2s" on the front of the jersey, and the "2s" on the shoulders are different.

Another example...look at the "7s"...

Other than the 2s and 7s, the numbers are exactly the same. I know I'm nitpicking, but are there any other teams that use 2 different number fonts on the same jersey?

[Sodboy13]

Some use different manifestations of the same font... a lot of block numbers are proportionally different on the shoulders and sleeves than they are on the front of the jersey. Plus there are little things, like the "5"s on the Packers jerseys - rather different from chest to shoulder.

I'd say the best current example is the Chicago Bears. The numbers look completely different from the sleeve to the chest, though I gues technically they'd be the same font. Of course, Reebok refuses to recognize this fact when producing replica jerseys and even retail "authentics," which is why just about every Bears jersey sold in stores looks like overpriced knockoff crap. The only time I've seen proper sleeve numbering on a Bears jersey during the Reebok monopoly era is last year at Marshall Field's on State Street, where some of the "authentics" on the rack used the proper, bolder number font.

Nike and Champion used to have it nailed, though.

[TheOldRoman]

Some use different manifestations of the same font... a lot of block numbers are proportionally different on the shoulders and sleeves than they are on the front of the jersey. Plus there are little things, like the "5"s on the Packers jerseys - rather different from chest to shoulder.

I'd say the best current example is the Chicago Bears. The numbers look completely different from the sleeve to the chest, though I gues technically they'd be the same font. Of course, Reebok refuses to recognize this fact when producing replica jerseys and even retail "authentics," which is why just about every Bears jersey sold in stores looks like overpriced knockoff crap. The only time I've seen proper sleeve numbering on a Bears jersey during the Reebok monopoly era is last year at Marshall Field's on State Street, where some of the "authentics" on the rack used the proper, bolder number font.

Nike and Champion used to have it nailed, though.

Wow, I never even thought about the replicas having incorrect sleeve numbers. Now that I look at my Urlacher jersey, I see it.

As for the first question, most baseabll teams using MLB Block numbers have a slightly different set for the front and back. As with the Bears' sleeves, the front numbers are much thicker, although they are the same font. You can kinda see it

here

The front numbers are proportionally thicker than the back numbers. Because of that, they look more squished.

[slapshot]

Some use different manifestations of the same font... a lot of block numbers are proportionally different on the shoulders and sleeves than they are on the front of the jersey. Plus there are little things, like the "5"s on the Packers jerseys - rather different from chest to shoulder.

I'd say the best current example is the Chicago Bears. The numbers look completely different from the sleeve to the chest, though I gues technically they'd be the same font. Of course, Reebok refuses to recognize this fact when producing replica jerseys and even retail "authentics," which is why just about every Bears jersey sold in stores looks like overpriced knockoff crap. The only time I've seen proper sleeve numbering on a Bears jersey during the Reebok monopoly era is last year at Marshall Field's on State Street, where some of the "authentics" on the rack used the proper, bolder number font.

Nike and Champion used to have it nailed, though.

Thank you for calling out Reebok on that. Unfortunately, not many people are aware of it as they should be, otherwise the replicas would be manufactured correctly.

Many teams have sleeve numbers that are proportionally wider than the fronts and backs. San Diego and Washington are two examples off the top of my head.

Another difference is with the number 5. Green Bay is the only NFL team that has an extra notch on the bottom of the vertical stroke where it would start to curve to form the bowl. Seen here:

However, the shoulder 5's do not have this notch, and they are also wider proportionally.

There are many NCAA teams wearing Nike uniforms that also feature the notched 5 on the fronts and backs but not on the shoulders or sleeves.

I don't know any other teams that have glaringly different number fonts on the uniforms. There many be some slight differences in hockey, but Im pretty sure there are none that are intentionally different by design.

[John in KY]

I couldn't find a decent photo, but the Dallas Cowboys had different fonts for the TV numbers than the main numbers for years - the used plain numbers for the TV numbers (on both the shoulders and the sleeves, depending on the year) and those "old west" numbers with the square serifs on the main body from their inception through 1981, changing to plain numbers in 1982.

[Discrim]

all ya need to do is dig for one of the games the past two years where they wore the throwbacks...heck, I recall in the first Boys-Skins game last season the vast majority of the Cowboys had the old-school serifed numbers on the torso, plain block on the sleeves...but then there was Jose Cortez, whose torso digits were mysteriously in the same style as the white jersey's numbers

then I remember reading here that the Bengals had inconsistent numbers in the late 80s-some guys had the Champion block (what Notre Dame used to use), some had plain block.

and don't get me started on Hawaii...though not a number inconsistency, if you've ever watched one of their games since they went to the green and black, you're liable to see at least three fonts used for the nameplates

[sj32]

Probably the biggest discrepancy would be the 1972 Oakland A's. They used a block font on the numbers on the back and the old "Expos" font for the numbers on the front. They ditched the front numbers in 1973.