When I started writing this column, I had every intention of bashing the National Hockey League. The league has been coordinating with Reebok to create new uniforms for its teams. Initially, it did not look good for the league's (already fractured) credibility. The resemblance of the situation to the NBA's fiasco in implementing a new ball had me ready to go off on the NHL like Don Shula on Nick Saban.
I know this is a very revolutionary idea, but the NHL powers actually let their players try out the new jerseys before they effectively forced all teams to adopt them. In that regard, the league definitely did one better than the NBA, whose synthetic ball fiasco grabbed negative headlines for Commissioner David Stern. The initial reports from teams about the new uniforms, however, were very negative.
So what was the logical move to ensure that the NHL remained the laughingstock of the sports world? Allow their players to try out the jerseys, express aversion to them and then make everyone use them.
Along the way, something strange happened -- in a stunning show of common sense, the NHL listened to its players and altered the jerseys to their preferences. In the process, the move completely altered the direction I was going with my column. In the long-run, though, that is probably a good thing.
If you somehow have Versus and watched the NHL All-Star Game last night, you were able to check out the latest version of the new jersey template in action. With what little coverage the NHL gets and the fact that the league has been secretive about its plans, however, chances are you weren't even aware of the uniform changes.
Essentially, the new jerseys offer a thinner material that is water- resistant (like those Dockers Stain Defender khakis) and will eliminate sweat quicker, a logical progression in the recent UnderArmour sports takeover. What caught my eye was not upgrading materials to keep athletes more comfortable but rather the way in which the new jerseys initially affected hockey's customary look.
The new duds have a slimmer fit on players (to eliminate the prevalent baggy jerseys) and were originally meant to be tucked in. This would have eliminated the horizontal trim along the jersey's hemline, a look that distinguishes hockey in the uniform department and has been a longtime tradition of the sport. Enough players expressed disinterest in the constricting feel of tucking in the jerseys that Reebok redesigned them, ensuring that the signature un-tucked look would remain a hockey staple.
Since the hemline trim will remain and players seem to be happy with the jerseys as they stand now, the only beef I have left is the fact that the league seems to have adopted a template for all of its teams to use. The potential loss of several classic jersey looks (especially those of the Original Six organizations) due to the new template would truly be a tragedy.
The Buffalo Sabres changed their uniforms this season (and introduced a really terrible new logo). The design included a side panel on the jersey that synced up with the pants and featured no horizontal hemline trim, probably in anticipation of the new jerseys. While at this point, the NHL maintains that no one will be forced to fit a template, many hockey purists fear that redesigns will have it in mind and the traditional look, as well as uniqueness and creativity, will be lost.
I admit that this is not the most pressing issue and that most of you may not even care about it at all. But for people like me who enjoy so-called "athletics aesthetics" this was a big deal. Further, though my original plan to criticize the league was later proven moot, I think the unprecedented initial idea of completely altering the entire league's jerseys was a prime example of things in sports that don't pass the common sense test or seem to be changed just for the sake of change.
Given the chance, there are so many things more deserving of modification than NHL jersey templates: the train wreck that is the BCS, the exorbitant number of bowl games, the ridiculous sponsors taking over the names of said bowl games, the No Fun League's policy on touchdown celebrations and the fact that they still play the Pro Bowl. And all of that was just football!
I could go all day with things that don't make much sense in sports. While at the heart of any of these issues is undoubtedly money, more than anything else, I don't believe it's fruitless to speak out against them in the hopes that, at some point, the powers-that-be might come to their senses and meaningful changes will be made in lieu of the seemingly unnecessary ones.
Read More
Abysmal start proves too much to overcome as Virginia exits ACC Tournament early
By Ryan Weiner | YesterdayIf the Cavaliers make the NCAA Tournament, they cannot afford to play another game like this.
As the Walshes take their final bow, the swimming world pauses
By Xander Tilock | 2 days agoHow could anyone possibly describe the success of this duo?
Virginia women’s track & field wins ACC Championships
By Caroline Wulff | 3 days agoThe last time the Virginia women’s track and field team won ACC Outdoor Championships was 1987 — at least until this past weekend.
