Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Question on "Pre-Numbers" Throwback Uniform Games

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Question on "Pre-Numbers" Throwback Uniform Games

    http://www.nydailynews.com/sports/ba...icle-1.1063596

    To Celebrate Fenway Park's 100th birthday, the Red Sox and Yankees (the same team the Sox played the day Fenway opened) will wear "throwback" 1912 uniforms. I've always enjoyed seeing the game remember its history like this.

    My question here is, will the uniforms have the players numbers on the back? Of course, no team wore numbers in 1912. And maybe they won't do it for tonight's game, either but I figure if every player can take the field wearing 42 on Jackie Robinson Day, it's the same as wearing no number at all. So why not go ahead and make the throwback uniform that much more accurate?

    And with today's big jumbotrons, do uniform numbers even serve much of a purpose anymore? Please note I am NOT advocating that numbers should be done away with on the uniform.

  • #2
    They do serve a purpose. If you don't have names or numbers on the uniforms, then you have no choice but to rely on the Jumbotron at the game or the announcers and occassional television graphics if you need to know the identity of a player.

    I'll say the same thing that I said in the update logos and uniforms thread: just because you have other ways to know whom a player is doesn't mean that names and numbers on uniforms are unnecessary.
    46 wins to match last year's total

    Comment


    • #3
      The White Sox have worn throwbacks to the Shoeless Joe era, and they had numbers on them. The font was stylized to go along with the lettering on the jersey. I'm assuming the MLB rulebook has regulations for the uniforms, one of them being that there must be a number on the back.
      Baseball Junk Drawer

      Comment


      • #4
        Originally posted by SamtheBravesFan View Post
        They do serve a purpose. If you don't have names or numbers on the uniforms, then you have no choice but to rely on the Jumbotron at the game or the announcers and occassional television graphics if you need to know the identity of a player.

        I'll say the same thing that I said in the update logos and uniforms thread: just because you have other ways to know whom a player is doesn't mean that names and numbers on uniforms are unnecessary.
        I don't think uniform numbers are unecessary. I can't imagine today's uniforms without numbers. Neither could the players. But I can't discount the Jumbotron, either. Thanks to today's "unobstructed view" ballparks, upper decks are built further back from the field and fans are farther away from the players than they have ever been.

        Again, I'm not advocating numbers should not be on today's uniforms but I think in many ways they have become more about marketing (jersey sales) and memorials (retired numbers) than anything else.

        Comment


        • #5
          Originally posted by ian2813 View Post
          I'm assuming the MLB rulebook has regulations for the uniforms, one of them being that there must be a number on the back.
          Perhaps there is but just like there is a rule that #42 will never again be worn by another player, the rule could be broken for turn-back-the-clock pre-number uniforms.

          Comment


          • #6
            Originally posted by bryanac625 View Post
            Again, I'm not advocating numbers should not be on today's uniforms but I think in many ways they have become more about marketing (jersey sales) and memorials (retired numbers) than anything else.
            And there's absolutely nothing wrong with that. People associate numbers with players all the time; it'd be suicide to take that away from them.
            Last edited by SamtheBravesFan; 04-20-2012, 11:32 AM.
            46 wins to match last year's total

            Comment


            • #7
              Originally posted by SamtheBravesFan View Post
              And there's absolutely nothing wrong with that. People associate numbers with players all the time; it'd be suicide to take that away from them.
              I don't think they should. A uniform number is an integral part of the uniform for the player and for the fan. All I'm saying here is that it would be nice to see players "turn back the clock" in 1912 or whatever year leaving the name and uniform number off, thus making the uniform more retro. Maybe some teams already do this, I don't know.

              BTW, are you familiar with the book Now Batting, Number...? It has every player number and every team from the beginning to 2005. I mention it because some managers, like John McGraw and Joe McCarthy, never wore a number. Of course, some managers, like Connie Mack, never wore a uniform, either.

              Comment


              • #8
                Originally posted by ian2813 View Post
                I'm assuming the MLB rulebook has regulations for the uniforms, one of them being that there must be a number on the back.
                Apparently not, because the Yanks and Sox have no numbers on their jerseys for today's game.

                Comment


                • #9
                  Not a fan of managers and coaches wearing numbers. The numbers are wasted when they could easily be given to the players.
                  Using a stolen chant from Boston Celtics fans whenever an L.A. team is playing up there just reeks of inferiority complex.

                  If hitting a baseball is the toughest thing to do in sports, then pitching must be the easiest thing to do in sports.

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Originally posted by UnderPressure View Post
                    Not a fan of managers and coaches wearing numbers. The numbers are wasted when they could easily be given to the players.
                    Now that *is* a regulation - all baseball managers and coaches must wear the same uniforms as their team, and be given unique numbers. They're not even allowed to set foot on the field without them, I think.

                    As for wasting numbers - that's probably only a problem with the Yankees who seem to have half their numbers retired!

                    As for further regulations...if not for the Yankee tradition of never having names on the unis, I'd advocate making that a reg too. Have all teams required to have names on both road and away unis. But the Yankees have never had it, so therefore I'm against it.
                    Last edited by Mr. Laser Beam; 04-20-2012, 04:02 PM.
                    It is by caffeine alone I set my mind in motion. It is by the beans of Java that thoughts acquire speed, the hands acquire shakes, the shakes become a warning. It is by caffeine alone I set my mind in motion.

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Waht's the oldest throwback jerseys ever worn, anyway?

                      I'd get a kick out of seeing uniforms from that year they have every position don different colors. Or maybe the 1869 Red Stockings' ones for the 150th anniversary in 2019.

                      Some of think starts to get downright Veeckish or Frinleyesque, though it is fun I love doing what-ifs and thinking of what stuff Charlie Finley could pull in an alternate universe. (Like moving a team to Texas, hiring Rogers Hornsby to manage and asking him to hit, and having the players don ball caps that look like cowboy hats.:clowning:
                      If Baseball Integrated Early - baseball integrated from the beginning - and "Brotherhood and baseball," the U.S. history companion, at http://www.lulu.com/spotlight/Baseballifsandmore - IBIE updated for 2011.

                      "Full House Chronology" at yahoo group fullhousefreaks & fullhouse4life with help of many fans, thanks for the input

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Originally posted by UnderPressure View Post
                        Not a fan of managers and coaches wearing numbers. The numbers are wasted when they could easily be given to the players.
                        WRONG
                        the numbers for managers and coaches are NOT wasted
                        the players have FIRST choice
                        two examples:
                        mookie wilson who wears # 1 for the mets, had to give up his number to a player
                        and the manager of the yankees wanted #28, so he had a gentlemen's agreement(bought)
                        with the player that was assign that number

                        most of the time's a manager or coach (and sometimes other players)WILL give up their number to a player
                        if the player has a connection to that number.
                        the ONLY exception being the retired numbers of the yankees
                        A-rod wears #13 for #3 is babe ruth's number

                        the Miami Marlins this year took a number out of retirement
                        so that a player may wear that number.
                        I think the number was retired for the owner, he was a HUGE fan
                        of mickey mantle, so the marlins retire mickey's number for the owner
                        sigpic

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Do most managers who are former players, wear the same number they wore as a player?
                          It is by caffeine alone I set my mind in motion. It is by the beans of Java that thoughts acquire speed, the hands acquire shakes, the shakes become a warning. It is by caffeine alone I set my mind in motion.

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Originally posted by Mr. Laser Beam View Post
                            Now that *is* a regulation - all baseball managers and coaches must wear the same uniforms as their team, and be given unique numbers. They're not even allowed to set foot on the field without them, I think.

                            As for wasting numbers - that's probably only a problem with the Yankees who seem to have half their numbers retired!

                            As for further regulations...if not for the Yankee tradition of never having names on the unis, I'd advocate making that a reg too. Have all teams required to have names on both road and away unis. But the Yankees have never had it, so therefore I'm against it.
                            It is an MLB regulation that visiting teams have their last name and number on their primary away jersey's
                            and all home team have numbers on their jersey

                            HOWEVER mlb can and has granted exceptions

                            as for team
                            the yankees requested and was granted that exception a long time ago
                            from year to year other teams do ask for exceptions
                            I think one year the S.F. giants did not have a name on both home and away jersey

                            for the players
                            there has been a few players granted exceptions (first name only) (jr) (initial and last name) etc
                            the most recent one is Mr. Suzuki of the Seattle Mariners

                            ICHIRO
                            sigpic

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Originally posted by Mr. Laser Beam View Post
                              Do most managers who are former players, wear the same number they wore as a player?
                              depends if the number is available and NOT retired by the team
                              sigpic

                              Comment

                              Ad Widget

                              Collapse
                              Working...
                              X