Houston Colt .45s jersey back....

[John in KY]

I just don't see the point of doing a "throwback" unifrom without utilizing all the elements of the uniform.

However, I'm sure that Antonio Gramsci and the guys down at the Frankfurt School could weave a critique that it was a sign of social progress.

This new Astro regime is beginning to stink.

It's not the management's fault. This one's on the league.

Agreed - the Astros intended for the Colt .45s jersey to be accurate and MLB forced them to take it off, much like they forced Tampa Bay to remove the cigar from the Smokers jersey they wore last year.

[illwauk]

Yeah, what the hell could the MLB do? We're already being sent to the AL West. How much more can the Astros be punished?

BTW - I'm against the gun not being on the throwback though not surprised. Frankly, I don't care for handguns. I've had a more than one pointed at me and it was always by someone trying to be tougher than their puny body could allow. My family is an Army family with someone serving in every war since D-Day. We have a hunting rifle.

But handguns owned by civilians always seemed... I dunno, desperate. I hear a lot from gun nuts about how owning a gun is the basis for our liberty but all those people who say that seem to be the type of wusses who haven't served. It seems to be about having a metal ding dong that is able to shoot death. And when you think of it like that, why does baseball need a gun penis metaphor when they already have a natural one with the baseball bats?

This one might be a bit too politically charged, but can I nominate it for POTD?

[Coast2CoastAM2006]

a gun itself is not the problem. Guns, bullets, swords, arrows etc, they don't kill people. People that have no business possessing them do. an image of a gun on a jersey is not going to hurt anyone. i don't think clear rational thinking people is going to see a gun on a jersey and say, 'oh jeez, let me pick up a gun and kill people.' all these people getting butt hurt over an image of a gun need to put some butt cream on that butt hurt and leave the jersey alone. it's not going to hurt anything having a gun on a jersey.

[oldschoolvikings]

Good God Almighty, those are three (yes, I said three) beautiful baseball uniforms!

I could spend all afternoon arguing with myself over which is best.

(There even going with the original screen-printed letters on the rainbows... so awesome)

[Bouj]

I figure one thing, they should probably have simply gone with the old shooting star set. It'd still have evoked the 60s, and they wouldn't have had to remove anything that absolutely HAD to be present on the uniform.

They are wearing that too, along with the Rainbow Guts jersey and 90s uniforms. The Astros are doing what the Angels did last year and wearing 5 different throwbacks for Friday games.

Check out what's in the link, though...

I'm not saying they didn't remove it, but they definitely planned to have the gun on it.

The jerseys in those pics are the originals. They are on display at Minute Maid Park in the team history display. They aren't the Majestic reproductions that the team wil wear.

Crane might be weak-willed on this, but he did not sell out the Astros to send them to the AL in order to get a $70M discount. Whoever bought the team was going to have to agree to the move. It was a condition of the sale to anyone, and it was due to MLB's decision not to move the Diamondbacks instead.

If the team had any courage, they would flip this back onto MLB by switching to the Colt .45 road greys and telling everyone who will listen that MLB banned the Colt .45's jersey.

And one last thing: somehow the grinning Indian caricature or the old Wahoo & Braves head sleeve patches are OK but the gun isn't? OK...

[CubsFanBudMan]

In this era of fauxbacks, I don't see the big deal. Add one more to the list. Just about every throwback is inaccurate in one way or another.

[IceCap]

In this era of fauxbacks, I don't see the big deal. Add one more to the list. Just about every throwback is inaccurate in one way or another.

True, but this one is missing a major design element.

If you're not going to reproduce the major design elements of a uniform then don't use that design as a throwback. Simple as that.

[charger77]

a gun itself is not the problem. Guns, bullets, swords, arrows etc, they don't kill people. People that have no business possessing them do. an image of a gun on a jersey is not going to hurt anyone. i don't think clear rational thinking people is going to see a gun on a jersey and say, 'oh jeez, let me pick up a gun and kill people.' all these people getting butt hurt over an image of a gun need to put some butt cream on that butt hurt and leave the jersey alone. it's not going to hurt anything having a gun on a jersey.

Exactly, don't the Blue Jackets have a cannon on their jersey?

[The_Admiral]

Well, yes, but most agree that cannon violence is at an all-time low.

[Firefly]

Well, yes, but most agree that cannon violence is at an all-time low.

Well, people take better care of cannons than they did back in the day of F Troop.

[Chawls]

Lemme ask this: Can fans buy the throwback with the pistol? If so, I don't really care about it's omission on the field.

But handguns owned by civilians always seemed... I dunno, desperate. I hear a lot from gun nuts about how owning a gun is the basis for our liberty but all those people who say that seem to be the type of wusses who haven't served. It seems to be about having a metal ding dong that is able to shoot death. And when you think of it like that, why does baseball need a gun penis metaphor when they already have a natural one with the baseball bats?

I question this being about MLB's intent to censor their penis metaphor. I think you might be reaching just a bit here.

[Enio125]

That's what I think of this.

[Bouj]

Lemme ask this: Can fans buy the throwback with the pistol? If so, I don't really care about it's omission on the field.

But handguns owned by civilians always seemed... I dunno, desperate. I hear a lot from gun nuts about how owning a gun is the basis for our liberty but all those people who say that seem to be the type of wusses who haven't served. It seems to be about having a metal ding dong that is able to shoot death. And when you think of it like that, why does baseball need a gun penis metaphor when they already have a natural one with the baseball bats?

I question this being about MLB's intent to censor their penis metaphor. I think you might be reaching just a bit here.

Recently, you could get the Colt 45's M&N wool throwback. I think MLB Shop had Wynn, Foxx, and Morgan jerseys over the last 6 months. They mysteriously dropped them. But you can still get them from the M&N website.

[TheOldRoman]

True, but this one is missing a major design element.

If you're not going to reproduce the major design elements of a uniform then don't use that design as a throwback. Simple as that.

Right, it is like if they reproduced the Barkley-era Suns jerseys without the sublimated sun on it. What would be the point? Either do it fully or don't do it at all.

[charger77]

Either do it fully or don't do it at all.

And I think that sums up the opinion of most of us here.

[Buster]

I'm surprised a Texas-based team would allow this PC crap to be pushed on them.

It looks ridiculous with half the logo.

[Lee.]

Does this about cover it?

[greyraven8]

If MLB won't let the Astros use the one on the left, maybe they should use the one on the right.

[CS85]

They need to do the Spielberg idea and replace the gun with a walkie talkie.

[NJTank]

They should not do a throwback if they cant do it right. Obviously in this wussified pc society you would not design a gun on a uniform today. However, this is a throwback from 1962 and that perspective should not be lost, and the Astros should include the gun.