Fjm Posted May 5, 2011 Share Posted May 5, 2011 So, bottom line, if I wanted to buy an authentic "B" logo cap, can I get one? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Anubis2051 Posted May 5, 2011 Share Posted May 5, 2011 So, bottom line, if I wanted to buy an authentic "B" logo cap, can I get one?Outside of ebay, no Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rossyo Posted May 11, 2011 Share Posted May 11, 2011 Gothamite: I tried to PM you but it said you couldn't accept any more messages. Could you please PM me ASAP regarding this logo? Thanks!Ross Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ferdinand Cesarano Posted November 25, 2011 Share Posted November 25, 2011 I thought it would be better to post to this thread than to start a new thread.Paul Lukas's Uni Watch blog has a link today to an auction for a Brooklyn Dodgers cold-weather coat. The seller claims that it comes from the 1940s, and that it was owned by Leo Durocher. (Nowhere in the listing does it say that the coat was used on the field.)The interesting thing is that it uses the Red Sox-style B, with no notch; it does not use the B with the two circles that we now all know was the one used by the Dodgers in the 40s:For comparison to the actual 1940s logo, here is the picture of the game-worn cap which Gothamite posted on the first page: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Anubis2051 Posted November 26, 2011 Share Posted November 26, 2011 I thought it would be better to post to this thread than to start a new thread.Paul Lukas's Uni Watch blog has a link today to an auction for a Brooklyn Dodgers cold-weather coat. The seller claims that it comes from the 1940s, and that it was owned by Leo Durocher. (Nowhere in the listing does it say that the coat was used on the field.)The interesting thing is that it uses the Red Sox-style B, with no notch; it does not use the B with the two circles that we now all know was the one used by the Dodgers in the 40s:For comparison to the actual 1940s logo, here is the picture of the game-worn cap which Gothamite posted on the first page:It's strange this came up today, I was at my uncles' last night for thanksgiving dinner and he had something I had never seen before. A 1941(or 43, can't remember) dodger program that featured the same B logo we know from the cooperstown caps.This one:I didn't get a picture, next time I go over I'll have to take one. But this certainly makes things a little more interesting. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gothamite Posted November 26, 2011 Author Share Posted November 26, 2011 Please do - I'd love to see it. I've seen the "B" from that Durocher jacket before. Mitchell and Ness used to sell a jacket with a similar logo, based on (I believe) a photo of Campanella:To my knowledge, that version only ever appeared on jackets. The Green Bay Packers Uniform Database! Now in a handy blog. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wdm1219inpenna Posted November 26, 2011 Share Posted November 26, 2011 I wasn't born until 1966, almost a decade after the Brooklyn Dodgers up and left for L.A. That being said, am I the only one who is bothered by the fact that the LOS ANGELES Dodgers are wearing uniforms that say "Brooklyn" on it? That would be like the Washington Nationals donning a Montreal Expos uniform to me. Just seems to be a slap in the face to the memory of the Brooklyn Dodgers to me. Football can get away with it more as they seldom if ever wear the city name on their uniform. When the K.C. Chiefs don their Dallas Texans uniforms, that doesn't bother me as much. Hunt moved the team from Dallas to K.C. because the NFL put a team in Dallas in 1960 at the same time as the A.F.L. started, and even though the Texans were better than the Cowboys, Lamar Hunt put the LEAGUE first, and uprooted to K.C. For that reason, it doesn't bother me as much. Even when the Titans don the Oiler uniforms, that doesn't bother me since they are the same franchise continued on (unlike the Browns/Ravens), and also because they were the Tennessee Oilers for 2 seasons. I can't understand why they didn't just come up with Titans right away back in 1997?If the Baltimore Orioles wore "St. Louis Browns" uniforms that would bother me. If the Texas Rangers or Minnesota Twins wore "Washington Senators" uniforms, that would bother me. If the Braves play the Brewers in Milwaukee and don the Milwaukee Braves uniforms, that doesn't bother me as much. It just rubbed me the wrong way seeing the current Dodgers wearing a uniform saying "Brooklyn". I guess I'm weird. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Quillz Posted November 26, 2011 Share Posted November 26, 2011 It doesn't really bother me. It's the franchise's history, they should be allowed to embrace it occasionally. Besides, it gives people a chance to see what the old Brooklyn uniforms looked like who otherwise wouldn't have been alive at the time. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RedSox44 Posted November 26, 2011 Share Posted November 26, 2011 I wasn't born until 1966, almost a decade after the Brooklyn Dodgers up and left for L.A. That being said, am I the only one who is bothered by the fact that the LOS ANGELES Dodgers are wearing uniforms that say "Brooklyn" on it? That would be like the Washington Nationals donning a Montreal Expos uniform to me. Just seems to be a slap in the face to the memory of the Brooklyn Dodgers to me. Football can get away with it more as they seldom if ever wear the city name on their uniform. When the K.C. Chiefs don their Dallas Texans uniforms, that doesn't bother me as much. Hunt moved the team from Dallas to K.C. because the NFL put a team in Dallas in 1960 at the same time as the A.F.L. started, and even though the Texans were better than the Cowboys, Lamar Hunt put the LEAGUE first, and uprooted to K.C. For that reason, it doesn't bother me as much. Even when the Titans don the Oiler uniforms, that doesn't bother me since they are the same franchise continued on (unlike the Browns/Ravens), and also because they were the Tennessee Oilers for 2 seasons. I can't understand why they didn't just come up with Titans right away back in 1997?If the Baltimore Orioles wore "St. Louis Browns" uniforms that would bother me. If the Texas Rangers or Minnesota Twins wore "Washington Senators" uniforms, that would bother me. If the Braves play the Brewers in Milwaukee and don the Milwaukee Braves uniforms, that doesn't bother me as much. It just rubbed me the wrong way seeing the current Dodgers wearing a uniform saying "Brooklyn". I guess I'm weird.But the thing is, the LA Dodgers brought the Bklyn Dodgers history with them to Chavez Ravine. The Nationals stripped almost every part of the Expos away from them (they're only considering honoring the Expos retired numbers like Rusty Staub, Gary Carter, et al). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Anubis2051 Posted December 26, 2011 Share Posted December 26, 2011 I thought it would be better to post to this thread than to start a new thread.Paul Lukas's Uni Watch blog has a link today to an auction for a Brooklyn Dodgers cold-weather coat. The seller claims that it comes from the 1940s, and that it was owned by Leo Durocher. (Nowhere in the listing does it say that the coat was used on the field.)The interesting thing is that it uses the Red Sox-style B, with no notch; it does not use the B with the two circles that we now all know was the one used by the Dodgers in the 40s:For comparison to the actual 1940s logo, here is the picture of the game-worn cap which Gothamite posted on the first page:It's strange this came up today, I was at my uncles' last night for thanksgiving dinner and he had something I had never seen before. A 1941(or 43, can't remember) dodger program that featured the same B logo we know from the cooperstown caps.This one:I didn't get a picture, next time I go over I'll have to take one. But this certainly makes things a little more interesting.So I promised I would get it, and here it is. Program is from 1945, and it is 100% the real deal. Picture's blurry (had to take it with my phone), but that is CLEARLY the "cooperstown" logo that we all thought was only used for the few years the caps were made in Boston, and only on the caps. Strange to see it on print from this era. Perhaps it was the print logo, and that's why it survived?whatever the reason, there is certainly a new piece to this puzzle. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
justen Posted December 26, 2011 Share Posted December 26, 2011 Except theres a difference, the program B has a square/diamond and the cooperstown hat has a triangle. Small difference, but still incorrect Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mac the Knife Posted December 26, 2011 Share Posted December 26, 2011 Yeah, that design is actually different from both the actual logo and the Cooperstown version. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kevinmets Posted December 26, 2011 Share Posted December 26, 2011 Except theres a difference, the program B has a square/diamond and the cooperstown hat has a triangle. Small difference, but still incorrectAlso the inner corners of the program B are rounded, whereas they're right angles on the hat. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gothamite Posted December 26, 2011 Author Share Posted December 26, 2011 Exactly - on that logo, the notch is formed by the natural curve of the loops, unlike the Cooperstown logo where it's tacked on and interrupts those loops. Still, an outstanding find! Very cool. The Green Bay Packers Uniform Database! Now in a handy blog. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.