Tigers-Mariners throwbacks on 7/9

[no97]

Another thing that impressed me - the uniforms actually fit the players instead of the oversized, baggy look seen waaaay too ofen with "turn back the clock" games.

Um, I completely disagree. Especially when it comes to the really old unis. Check out this photo of Jackie Robinson in his Kansas City Monarchs uni:

Now compare that to the "baggy look" you're complaining about in the TBTC games. I'd say they've gotten the fit just right, wouldn't you say?

Moose

[SabreGuy]

Unless I'm remembering incorrectly, in Ball Four, Jim Bouton mentions that in '69, players liked to have their pants tailored to be extra tight. So if anything, the unis in the throwback to '69 might still be a little loose, but I agree they look REALLY good, better than the older throwbacks usually look for some reason.

[cranium]

Unless I'm remembering incorrectly, in Ball Four, Jim Bouton mentions that in '69, players liked to have their pants tailored to be extra tight. So if anything, the unis in the throwback to '69 might still be a little loose, but I agree they look REALLY good, better than the older throwbacks usually look for some reason.

Amen on the striped Stirrups being awesome. Did all the players where them right? Or, were there a few holdouts who insisted upon wearing the pants all the way down to their cleats?

Regarding the fit of the uniform, this may be a stickler point, but I'd prefer that the unis "fit" just as they did in the period. Thus, if they were baggy in the '50s, then Fifties throwbacks should be worn baggy. Conversely, if they style was normally tight, like the '70, then they should be worn tight. I think that is why some of the '70s throwback unis have looked so dumpy because the players were wearing them way more baggy than they would have in the '70s. I'll never forget Sabathia in that baggy Indians uniform. ugh.

[no97]

Unless I'm remembering incorrectly, in Ball Four, Jim Bouton mentions that in '69, players liked to have their pants tailored to be extra tight.  So if anything, the unis in the throwback to '69 might still be a little loose, but I agree they look REALLY good, better than the older throwbacks usually look for some reason.

Regarding the fit of the uniform, this may be a stickler point, but I'd prefer that the unis "fit" just as they did in the period. Thus, if they were baggy in the '50s, then Fifties throwbacks should be worn baggy. Conversely, if they style was normally tight, like the '70, then they should be worn tight. I think that is why some of the '70s throwback unis have looked so dumpy because the players were wearing them way more baggy than they would have in the '70s. I'll never forget Sabathia in that baggy Indians uniform. ugh.

Oh, I'd agree with this completely. I wasn't saying that they should have been baggy, just that to say that baggy is bad is wrong, as that was the style, especially with the flannel unis. Now, I agree, that if a poly uni's being "thrown-back" to, baggy is not correct. But, you can't just dismiss the baggy look out of hand, and say it looks bad, because, as the photo of Jackie Robinson I posted proves, that's the way the flannel uni's were!

Moose

[snetsrak43]

As far as baggy, non-baggy, players should just go with whatever is comfortable for them. Even if its all mental, if wearing something extra baggy or extra tight is gonna mess with your performance you shouldn't do it. I know that might upset history buffs who want accuracy, but that is second to winning.

[SabreGuy]

Unless I'm remembering incorrectly, in Ball Four, Jim Bouton mentions that in '69, players liked to have their pants tailored to be extra tight.  So if anything, the unis in the throwback to '69 might still be a little loose, but I agree they look REALLY good, better than the older throwbacks usually look for some reason.

Regarding the fit of the uniform, this may be a stickler point, but I'd prefer that the unis "fit" just as they did in the period. Thus, if they were baggy in the '50s, then Fifties throwbacks should be worn baggy. Conversely, if they style was normally tight, like the '70, then they should be worn tight. I think that is why some of the '70s throwback unis have looked so dumpy because the players were wearing them way more baggy than they would have in the '70s. I'll never forget Sabathia in that baggy Indians uniform. ugh.

Oh, I'd agree with this completely. I wasn't saying that they should have been baggy, just that to say that baggy is bad is wrong, as that was the style, especially with the flannel unis. Now, I agree, that if a poly uni's being "thrown-back" to, baggy is not correct. But, you can't just dismiss the baggy look out of hand, and say it looks bad, because, as the photo of Jackie Robinson I posted proves, that's the way the flannel uni's were!

Moose

Right... I don't think I was saying anything differently either. Someday, 50 years in the future, when they do 2006 throwbacks, it'd be cool if some players poked their cleats through the back of their uni pants like Manny Ramirez, or put some elastic on there a la Barry Bonds. If they're they type to go for historical accuracy. (snetsrak43's point about winning notwithstanding... clearly that's most important.)

[hawk36]

This should be a lesson to uniform designers everywhere. The Pilots unis were special, different not simply to be different, but different for a reason... they actually thought about and incorporated elements of the team name (wings on the bill, etc.). How sad that now days anything that is not "cookie cutter trendy" will never see the light of day. They knew about good design in 1969 and were actually able to incorporate it.

[ykiki5]

Unless I'm remembering incorrectly, in Ball Four, Jim Bouton mentions that in '69, players liked to have their pants tailored to be extra tight.  So if anything, the unis in the throwback to '69 might still be a little loose, but I agree they look REALLY good, better than the older throwbacks usually look for some reason.

Regarding the fit of the uniform, this may be a stickler point, but I'd prefer that the unis "fit" just as they did in the period. Thus, if they were baggy in the '50s, then Fifties throwbacks should be worn baggy. Conversely, if they style was normally tight, like the '70, then they should be worn tight. I think that is why some of the '70s throwback unis have looked so dumpy because the players were wearing them way more baggy than they would have in the '70s. I'll never forget Sabathia in that baggy Indians uniform. ugh.

Oh, I'd agree with this completely. I wasn't saying that they should have been baggy, just that to say that baggy is bad is wrong, as that was the style, especially with the flannel unis. Now, I agree, that if a poly uni's being "thrown-back" to, baggy is not correct. But, you can't just dismiss the baggy look out of hand, and say it looks bad, because, as the photo of Jackie Robinson I posted proves, that's the way the flannel uni's were!

Moose

I agree, the uniforms were baggy back in the Jackie Robinson era. However, I was alluding to a few years ago when the Mariners wore 1977 replica uniforms and they were embarasingly baggy. If anything, they should've been tight. Edgar Martinez and Jay Buhner looked awful, as their uniforms were even baggier than Jackie Robinson's! I've seen a few other teams wear ill-fitting, baggy, polyester uniforms from the 1970's as well. My point was simply to commend Majestic for doing a pretty good job with "the fit". Photo from this Seattle Pilots page.