Tradition schmradition

[The_Admiral]

Giants still go no-name home, name on the road, right?

Yeah, those Cubs jerseys looked so stupid. I think it was some "we're about the name on the front" initiative after Alou and Sosa left. That went well.

[TheOldRoman]

Yep, no names on the Giants' home and orange jerseys. Also, when they had two black alts in 2001, the home "Giants" alt was nameless while the road "San Francisco" alt had names. I think it's dumb. The Yankees should never have names on their jerseys, but everyone else should. Either way, do the same thing on the home and road.

[Lights Out]

The Yankees need to use the cap NY for everything, including the home jersey. It's the cleanest and most iconic of all the distinct versions they use.

[Western Michigan]

I really dislike Michigan's football uniforms.

Firstly, get rid of the winged helmet. I know that's the symbol of Michigan football now, but it's not the 1920's anymore, and since Michigan and Yale aren't the only two teams playing in the NCAA, Michigan isn't good anymore.

Secondly, I hate how the home uniforms are incredibly plain, yet the road uniforms have accent stripes and whatnot.

They have a great color set and a pretty nice block M for the logo. It's kind of a shame that they limit how good they could look just for tradition's sake of being good 100 years ago.

[winghaz]

One of the smartest things the NFL did was, with its merger with the AFL, put the names on the back of the players, as the AFL did. It's a league rule.

It also should be a rule in MLB. If MLB wants to be even more fan friendly, then put the names on the backs of the uniforms. Yes, including the Yankee uniforms.

I know, I know. This goes against tradition, and baseball really does thrive on tradition more than any other sport. But I see this as more of housecleaning. It wouldn't drastically change the uniforms, and it would be a good new tradition.

[hormone]

Here's my (controversial list) in no particular order

Steelers logo on one side (I think they should drop the gray outline, add a yellow outline, and have rivets "holding" the logo on the helmet...one for each SB win), Browns no logo, any team wearing gray masks for retro's sake (SF, Indy), college teams with no logos (ND - heck put the ND or a shamrock there, BC - put an eagle there, PSU - put your lion there, etc), any NHL team wearing a lace up for retro's sake. I'm mean, it's 2011. You can upgrade without going all Oregon. The Red Sox have tweaked unis and lived. One other pet peeve...Buffalo teams featuring a Buffalo. That's the city, not the nickname.

[The_Admiral]

If MLB wants to be even more fan friendly, then put the names on the backs of the uniforms. Yes, including the Yankee uniforms.

But seeing as the Yankee uniforms feature only one color, you're looking at slapping single-color names on the back. Either you have the pinstripes running through the letters and making a mess, or you put the names on solid white nameplates and graft those on the world's most famous uniform, making the New York Yankees look like they had to buy some bootleg replicas from across the street. The simplicity is as much an aesthetic one as it is a traditional one.

[Varsity Blue]

I'm a traidtionalist when it comes to uniforms. I don't mind change, but I usually don't like change in traditional-looking uniforms.

But I also recognize there are some serious flaws in many traditional uniforms. There are things I don't like, and I'm sure there are things you don't like in some traditional uniforms. So I'll start out with a few of my pet peeves:

Pittsburgh Steelers logo on one side of the helmet

Ughhh. The Steelers should have changed that notion the second year of having a logo on the helmet. But since they have won gazillions of Super Bowls with that look, they likely never will change. It still looks like they were too cheap to buy two logos for the helmet.

Penn State's logo-less helmet

Yeah, we've talked about this ad nausium and came up with all sorts of new looks for Penn State. And, despite tradition, this look is still bad. Simply putting the Nittany Lion logo on the helmet would definitely look better.

Alabama's helmets with numbers

Just because these were the uniforms of Bear Bryant doesn't make them look good. Put those numbers on the shoulders and put that script Bama A on the helmets.

Cleveland Browns' logo-less helmet

See Penn State. Heck, I'd almost rather see Chief Wahoo on the helmets. Almost. Put something there, please.

Minnesota Twins' TC

What the heck? A Twins fan not loving the TC? Well, I do love the tradition of it, but it's really not a good logo, especially considering the Twins are much more than the Twin Cities. Sure, I'm not going to advocate a UM for Upper Midwst, but I always thought the Twins could have done better. The Kirby Puckett era M isn't bad, but I'd rather see something else.

1. Agree

2. Agree

3. Agree

4. Disagree

A shamrock on Notre Dame's helmets don't bother me at all and neither does adding a decal to Ohio State's. In the interest of fair play, Texas could add a stripe to the center of its helmet also.

[winghaz]

To admiral: The Yankees aren't the only team that have pinstripes. There are other teams that have pinstripes and have names on the back of their jerseys. It works.

[Jungle Jim]

Absolutely nothing is worse than the Steelers' one-sided helmet logo. It's not just ugly, it's dumb.

As for others, everyone seems to love the football uniforms of USC, but they annoy me because they have those modern-ish looking panels on the shoulders of their jerseys and then have racing stripes down the pants. Either do racing stripes or don't.

Also, LSU's helmets seem to be widely liked, but I don't. It looks like someone used electrical tape to form the letters and the tiger is completely indistinguishable from a few feet away...

Those SC uniforms are modeled on their uniforms from the 60s and 70s. I wouldn't consider those inserts "modern."

Well, those are actually throwbacks from head to toe. Not really modern at all. The Redskins used a shoulder insert like that on their feather-helmet uniform as well.

Oh, I knew the shoulder panels went all the way back to the O.J. era. Maybe "futuristic" would have been a better term to use than "modern", in that futuristic seemed to be in fashion in the 60s.

Either way, it seems to be a mix of styles and elements. It didn't look right in the 60s and it doesn't look right today.

[CrazyAnna]

I really dislike Michigan's football uniforms.

Firstly, get rid of the winged helmet.

[Riatt]

I LOVE the Steelers look. It's unique, something that rarely happens in todays sports uni/logo world.

Except Iowa has the exact same uniforms.

That's not exactly the Steeler's fault if Iowa wants to copy them.

Anyways, I do agree the Steeler's uniforms are getting outdated. Other traditions I don't like:

Gray facemasks on non-gray teams. It looks sloppy and outdated.

Notre Dame's helmet. Put a shamrock on there, it looks beautiful.

The TV numbers on the Flyer's jerseys are hard to read on TV, and would be fine in black. Same thing with the captain's C on the road now.

[the_fan]

Steelers should go with their throwbacks. Those are awesome.

[CJworks]

If MLB wants to be even more fan friendly, then put the names on the backs of the uniforms. Yes, including the Yankee uniforms.

But seeing as the Yankee uniforms feature only one color, you're looking at slapping single-color names on the back. Either you have the pinstripes running through the letters and making a mess, or you put the names on solid white nameplates and graft those on the world's most famous uniform, making the New York Yankees look like they had to buy some bootleg replicas from across the street. The simplicity is as much an aesthetic one as it is a traditional one.

That's why you outline the numbers in white.

I guess I don't have much of a problem with tradition, but I don't really care for the Yanks' or Cowboys' messes, as detailed above.

I do have to agree that Penn State would look pretty nice with the addition of a logo to the helmet.

[RedSox44]

One of the smartest things the NFL did was, with its merger with the AFL, put the names on the back of the players, as the AFL did. It's a league rule.

It also should be a rule in MLB. If MLB wants to be even more fan friendly, then put the names on the backs of the uniforms. Yes, including the Yankee uniforms.

I know, I know. This goes against tradition, and baseball really does thrive on tradition more than any other sport. But I see this as more of housecleaning. It wouldn't drastically change the uniforms, and it would be a good new tradition.

Red Sox fans would be literally pissed to see names on the back of the home uniforms.

[kw11333]

Why is everyone so concerned about names? If you don't have a program, you can just look it up on your phone. It would only take a second.

[andrewharrington]

Absolutely nothing is worse than the Steelers' one-sided helmet logo. It's not just ugly, it's dumb.

As for others, everyone seems to love the football uniforms of USC, but they annoy me because they have those modern-ish looking panels on the shoulders of their jerseys and then have racing stripes down the pants. Either do racing stripes or don't.

Also, LSU's helmets seem to be widely liked, but I don't. It looks like someone used electrical tape to form the letters and the tiger is completely indistinguishable from a few feet away...

Those SC uniforms are modeled on their uniforms from the 60s and 70s. I wouldn't consider those inserts "modern."

Well, those are actually throwbacks from head to toe. Not really modern at all. The Redskins used a shoulder insert like that on their feather-helmet uniform as well.

Oh, I knew the shoulder panels went all the way back to the O.J. era. Maybe "futuristic" would have been a better term to use than "modern", in that futuristic seemed to be in fashion in the 60s.

Either way, it seems to be a mix of styles and elements. It didn't look right in the 60s and it doesn't look right today.

Graphic design and industrial design in the 1960s may have been a bit futuristic, but football style in the 1960s was stripes, stripes and more stripes. It was the ubiquitous 'classic' or 'retro' or 'throwback' look. The Packers have a quintessential 1960s uniform. Those shoulder inserts are not futuristic. They give a similar appearance as a solid arm-loop. Think Colts, LSU or UCLA with the center part colored in the same as the outer parts. This isn't futuristic, either. It's simple and timeless, and it's basically the same look as USC, save for the feather on the helmet.

[cmm]

Why is everyone so concerned about names? If you don't have a program, you can just look it up on your phone. It would only take a second.

As a fan, I think having names looks better; jerseys look "naked" without them. I also don't have a smartphone to look up rosters if I'm in the stands. As a non-fan, I am a stats guy and anything that helps me identify players quickly is a big plus.

[The_Admiral]

To admiral: The Yankees aren't the only team that have pinstripes. There are other teams that have pinstripes and have names on the back of their jerseys. It works.

They either don't have single-layer lettering (Cubs, White Sox, Rockies, Astros) or have nameplates (old Twins).

[Legend]

I LOVE the Steelers look. It's unique, something that rarely happens in todays sports uni/logo world.

Except Iowa has the exact same uniforms.

Iowa only has one sided helmets too?