Jump to content

MLB Logo&Uniform changes


UnclearInitial

Recommended Posts

Of course it would have been bad PR. But that's the only reason not to have stopped them. I understand why MLB didn't do anything, but that doesn't mean I agree with the decision not to take action.

If a player is not in uniform, they don't take the field. Very simple.

I still wonder if any of those cross-dressers did more than just borrow a ballcap.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 2.3k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

I still wonder if any of those cross-dressers did more than just borrow a ballcap.

And for the record, the Mets have continually donated money to Tuesday's Children, who has helped the families of 9/11 first responders and victims since the attacks. They also offered free tickets today to 9/11 first responders. So yes, their good works have gone beyond the uniform.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Too bad. They should have.

Any of those cross-dressers donate time or money, or was wearing a ballcap the extent of their good works?

Actually, yes they did. During the week following 9/11, when no games were played and Shea Stadium was being used as a staging area for emergency supplies, Mets players showed up there every day and help load boxes etc. Manager Bobby Valentine stayed at the stadium 24/7 to help coordinate the activities, along with stadium management and staff.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Of course it would have been bad PR. But that's the only reason not to have stopped them. I understand why MLB didn't do anything, but that doesn't mean I agree with the decision not to take action.

If a player is not in uniform, they don't take the field. Very simple.

I agree with Gothamite. It's a professional league, and rules are rules. We're talking about uniforms, not "wear whatever you feel like" outfits. Did those Mets feel like they were making some kind of statement by being rebellious about it? It's stupid. Just wear a flag on your cap like everyone else, and honor all Americans involved in the tragedy and keeping us safe, not specific groups. That's probably why MLB didn't want the Mets to wear them, because they are too group-specific. There were many Americans who were heroes that day, and still are today (military, etc.), who aren't NYPD or FDNY. Which is why the flag makes a lot more sense.

Anyway, a few observations about the 9/11 uniforms/caps...

1) I noticed the Jays were wearing American and Canadian flag patches on opposite sides of their caps, and they had both flags as patches on the backs of their jerseys. Is this new? I had never seen the Jays (or Expos, for that matter), play on 9/11 until today and I wasn't sure if this was a new thing.

2) I could have sworn that Orioles pitcher Tommy Hunter did not have a flag patch on the back of his jersey today. I wonder if it just fell off or there is some other reason, although I would have no idea why.

Non-9/11-sidenote: Those Brewers alternates look great. They should make those the home alts and make the navy the road alts.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Good for them. That's what they should have been doing, instead of pimping out the team's uniform.

What's so wrong with doing both? Just because the Yankees chose not to wear special caps doesn't mean the Mets shouldn't be allowed to if they feel strongly about it. I think it was a kind gesture, not the sinister commercial plot that it's being ludicrously built up as in this thread.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Gothamite, I do not understand your criticism. You implied that the Mets wearing the FDNY / NYPD caps in 2001 was an insincere gesture because they did nothing to back up the symbolic honor. Yet when I point out that they did back up their gesture with legitimate action, you still criticize. What more would you have had them do?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The cap nonsense was itself a shallow and wrong-headed gesture, if you'll forgive the unintentional pun.

I wondered if any players did more and am glad to be reminded that they did. Those players deserve our respect and commendation, but that doesn't change the nature of the original shallow and wrong-headed gesture.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

One thing I can't say I ever heard then but todd Zeile said today is that the caps were actually given to them by first responders during visits with them. It wasn't like someone walked into the lockeroom with a box of caps and said lets wear these. If a fireman gives a plyer a cap and the player decides to wear it on the field its hard to say he's in no way honoring the FDNY by doing so.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I call bull :censored: on that one.

They just happened to bring enough for everyone, representing all the various organizations?

Maybe somebody brought in one, or a dozen. But at some point there was a deliberate effort to kit out the entire team with caps from all the various groups. Police, fire, Port Authority, all of them.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Here's a list of the teams who have worn vests recently and when they wore them:

Anaheim Angels/Los Angeles Angels of Anaheim ('97 - '10)

Arizona Diamondbacks ('98 - '06)

Chicago White Sox ('99 - '07)

Cincinnati Reds ('93 - '06)

Cleveland Indians ('02 - '07)

Colorado Rockies ('05 - '11)

Florida Marlins ('93 - '02)

Kansas City Royals ('02 - '05)

Minnesota Twins ('06 - '08)

Pittsburgh Pirates ('01 - '10)

Seattle Mariners ('97 - '00)

Tampa Bay Devil Rays ('01 - '07)

Texas Rangers ('04 - '08)

Toronto Blue Jays ('99 - '03)

The Angels didn't wear vests until 2002. The Blue Jays never wore vests.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

That's not really the same. This is more in line with why it's stupid for the Padres to wear camouflage (and it is).

I don't endorse wearing FDNY/NYPD stuff now, but when we as a nation were running around like chickens with our heads cut off, all that stuff seemed and probably was sincere and heartfelt and not at all motivated by marketing.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

That's not really the same. This is more in line with why it's stupid for the Padres to wear camouflage (and it is).

I don't endorse wearing FDNY/NYPD stuff now, but when we as a nation were running around like chickens with our heads cut off, all that stuff seemed and probably was sincere and heartfelt and not at all motivated by marketing.

I was kind of saying what I said as a hyperbole.

For your actual point, I still fail to see where this Mets thing falls into the corportate-marketing-whore thing. Are the Mets selling the FDNY/NYPD stuff? For Gothamite in particular, here's the answer on that:

The service hats will be put up for auction on Mets.com/gameused, with proceeds distributed to various 9/11 charities.

The Mets were wearing the hats in remembrance and tribute of the first responders of 9/11. Proceeds from these auctions are going to the places they need to go. These service hats are completely different from the Padres camouflage, the flag patch caps, or the Stars/Stripes caps. Those make money for the clubs and MLB, and people will buy them for being different and "Supportin' 'MURKAH". The Mets hats are charity auctions.

You people can be so ridiculous and cynical about these things, but then again, thems the internets!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think this is completely asinine by Major League Baseball. It was for one day and to recognize the people who lost their lives on that day and sacrificed for weeks and months as First Responders in New York. This is completely ridiculous by MLB and Joe Torre of all people who managed in New York. I guess he's gone corporate now and really forgot what the Mets wearing the hats meant to those who lost family and friends in responding to the Twin Towers and all those who worked their butts off trying to find people. I can understand this from the gutless wonder that use to be owner of that team in Milwaukee, but to see Joe Torre a New Yorker to turn his nose at the rest of the city, is an insult. I guess since it's not the Yankees, he do anything for them. I presume if it was the Yankees, then he's say okay. Well, then again, this is the same guy who had a dress standard with the Dodgers only to ignore it when Manny came to town. Joe Torre is playing favorites and is a complete two-timer.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Here's a list of the teams who have worn vests recently and when they wore them:

Anaheim Angels/Los Angeles Angels of Anaheim ('97 - '10)

Arizona Diamondbacks ('98 - '06)

Chicago White Sox ('99 - '07)

Cincinnati Reds ('93 - '06)

Cleveland Indians ('02 - '07)

Colorado Rockies ('05 - '11)

Florida Marlins ('93 - '02)

Kansas City Royals ('02 - '05)

Minnesota Twins ('06 - '08)

Pittsburgh Pirates ('01 - '10)

Seattle Mariners ('97 - '00)

Tampa Bay Devil Rays ('01 - '07)

Texas Rangers ('04 - '08)

Toronto Blue Jays ('99 - '03)

The Angels didn't wear vests until 2002. The Blue Jays never wore vests.

Yeah technically didn't the Blue Jays just have blue sleeves?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Here's a list of the teams who have worn vests recently and when they wore them:

Anaheim Angels/Los Angeles Angels of Anaheim ('97 - '10)

Arizona Diamondbacks ('98 - '06)

Chicago White Sox ('99 - '07)

Cincinnati Reds ('93 - '06)

Cleveland Indians ('02 - '07)

Colorado Rockies ('05 - '11)

Florida Marlins ('93 - '02)

Kansas City Royals ('02 - '05)

Minnesota Twins ('06 - '08)

Pittsburgh Pirates ('01 - '10)

Seattle Mariners ('97 - '00)

Tampa Bay Devil Rays ('01 - '07)

Texas Rangers ('04 - '08)

Toronto Blue Jays ('99 - '03)

The Angels didn't wear vests until 2002. The Blue Jays never wore vests.

What about these?

mo_vaughn.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.



×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use.