PDA

View Full Version : Do these jerseys look right? (Sox Cooperstown Jersey Discussion)


soxfandoug
02-07-2009, 07:09 AM
Hey guys,

I'm going to be getting autos from Steve Carlton and Tom Seaver at the end of the month. I've already got Sox 16x20s ready to go, but I was thinking about getting jerseys signed as well. I found these on eBay, but wanted opinions as to whether the lettering and whatnot looks okay. In particular, does the arch and positioning of the lettering look right? I don't want to get them if they look funny, lol.

Thanks!

Doug

http://imagehost.vendio.com/a/7926460/aview/carlton_32.jpg

http://imagehost.vendio.com/a/7926460/aview/1083072173541_seaver_2.jpg

C-Dawg
02-07-2009, 08:21 AM
I have to say the "arch" of the lettering looks too flat. And the Seaver one in particular looks like the lettering comes to a peak right in the middle, unless its something to do with the camera angle. But hey, those two guys aren't going to notice the difference!

Brian26
02-07-2009, 08:27 AM
This is really picky- but Carlton played on the Sox in 1986. His jersey would not have had that '85 patch on the left sleeve. Also note that the right sleeve has the Majestic logo on it.

The Seaver jersey is a Cooperstown, right?

soxfandoug
02-07-2009, 09:02 AM
Brian, that is exactly the kind of info I was looking for. It hadn't even dawned on me that the patch was out of place on a Carlton jersey.

There is a Cooperstown Collection Seaver jersey, but I'm pretty sure this isn't one of those. If I'm not mistaken, the M&N Seaver jersey doesn't have his name on it, just the number.

C-Dawg, I agree about the lettering seeming a tad bit flat. It just looked off to me, but I can overly picky sometimes. Glad to see I'm not the only one that thought so.

I think I will stick with my 16x20s, and maybe pick up a Cooperstown Seaver jersey. I'd really like one more Carlton item, though. I already have a ball and Sox 8x10 signed by him, can't think of anything else really.

I'm really stoked about Seaver, I'm getting this 16x20 signed:

http://www.ballen-photos.com/photos/images/fisk-seaver-1-cws.jpg

Hopefully I can get Fisk at some point as well.

*****Edit - Brian was right, the auction description of the Seaver does indicate that it is a Cooperstown Collection jersey. Is there a different Cooperstown Collection than Mitchell & Ness?

*****Edit again - It also states that the Carlton is a Cooperstown Collection jersey... maybe that refers to the base jersey, without lettering?

The Critic
02-07-2009, 09:35 AM
Doug, maybe pick up a Sox cap from those years and have Carlton sign the bill?
Just a thought.

Brian26
02-07-2009, 10:08 AM
I can't tell you how many of those '83 jerseys I saw last weekend with red felt letters and numbering on the back (instead of black).

Where is Seaver signing later this month?

soxfandoug
02-07-2009, 10:20 AM
Seaver and Carlton are doing a "Cy Young" show in Jersey. I've also got a Drabek Sox 16x20 to get signed. I haven't decided if I want to use airline miles to fly up, or just mail my stuff.

http://www.mab-celebrity.com/c-644-cy-young-3-february-28-march-1.aspx

Thanks for the suggestion, Critic. I'm not sure how I feel about signed hats. I have one signed by Luis Aparicio that I've never been particularly fond of.

whitesox901
02-07-2009, 02:39 PM
I luuuuuuuv those jerseys

Red Barchetta
02-08-2009, 10:58 PM
I can't tell you how many of those '83 jerseys I saw last weekend with red felt letters and numbering on the back (instead of black).

Where is Seaver signing later this month?

The official on-field jerseys had dark navy letters/numbers correct?

hi im skot
02-08-2009, 11:32 PM
The official on-field jerseys had dark navy letters/numbers correct?

Yeah.

PalehosePlanet
02-08-2009, 11:52 PM
The 1983 unis had the names on the back; the 1985, however, did not.

M&N carries both, the other differences being the patches. The '83 has the 50th all-star game patch, the '85 has the 75th anniversary of Comiskey Park patch.

BTW, that's a great photo Doug.

kruzer31
02-09-2009, 01:20 AM
Those jerseys are as close as you will get. That seller is legit. The only problem is that the patch is off with the Carlton. Majestic only made that Sox jersey with the comiskey 75th patch. And the Sox always had names on that style jersey, i dont know why Mitchell and Ness ever made them without

JEFF

kruzer31
02-09-2009, 01:21 AM
The 1983 unis had the names on the back; the 1985, however, did not.

M&N carries both, the other differences being the patches. The '83 has the 50th all-star game patch, the '85 has the 75th anniversary of Comiskey Park patch.

BTW, that's a great photo Doug.


The names were on the 85 jerseys my friend

http://i147.photobucket.com/albums/r306/kruze35/U85242030-8.jpg

soxfandoug
06-05-2009, 08:33 AM
Same question as my original post, different jersey. Does this look right? I'm mostly concerned with the material... it almost looks shiny!

http://i.ebayimg.com/20/%21BTo,P5%21%21mk%7E$%28KGrHgoOKiUEjlLmV5L+BKJdIhJ %292g%7E%7E_1.JPG

http://i.ebayimg.com/05/%21BTo,L0%21%212k%7E$%28KGrHgoOKi8EjlLmZdNYBKJdIN, Db%21%7E%7E_1.JPG

Thanks,

Doug

hi im skot
06-05-2009, 09:02 AM
Same question as my original post, different jersey. Does this look right? I'm mostly concerned with the material... it almost looks shiny!

http://i.ebayimg.com/20/%21BTo,P5%21%21mk%7E$%28KGrHgoOKiUEjlLmV5L+BKJdIhJ %292g%7E%7E_1.JPG

http://i.ebayimg.com/05/%21BTo,L0%21%212k%7E$%28KGrHgoOKi8EjlLmZdNYBKJdIN, Db%21%7E%7E_1.JPG

Thanks,

Doug

This is, without a doubt, a bootleg.

doublem23
06-05-2009, 09:14 AM
This is, without a doubt, a bootleg.

Definitely, they weren't even trying.

soxfandoug
06-05-2009, 09:29 AM
Thanks guys. I can see now that the Sox logo isn't even the right logo for the 1959 jersey. It is the current Sox logo, not the old school one that looks kind of crooked.

I figured it was too good to be true at that price!

Thanks again,

Doug

SoxFan1979
06-05-2009, 10:32 AM
Same question as my original post, different jersey. Does this look right? I'm mostly concerned with the material... it almost looks shiny!

http://i.ebayimg.com/20/%21BTo,P5%21%21mk%7E$%28KGrHgoOKiUEjlLmV5L+BKJdIhJ %292g%7E%7E_1.JPG

http://i.ebayimg.com/05/%21BTo,L0%21%212k%7E$%28KGrHgoOKi8EjlLmZdNYBKJdIN, Db%21%7E%7E_1.JPG

Thanks,

Doug

Yes it is. I bought one of Nellie Fox for $30 on ebay. You get what you paid for on those particular jerseys.

gr8mexico
06-05-2009, 04:43 PM
This is, without a doubt, a bootleg.
I agree I have seen them up close and they look like crap !!!!!
Almost like a cheap silk shirt

Nellie_Fox
06-06-2009, 01:34 AM
Same question as my original post, different jersey. Does this look right? I'm mostly concerned with the material... it almost looks shiny!

http://i.ebayimg.com/20/%21BTo,P5%21%21mk%7E$%28KGrHgoOKiUEjlLmV5L+BKJdIhJ %292g%7E%7E_1.JPG

http://i.ebayimg.com/05/%21BTo,L0%21%212k%7E$%28KGrHgoOKi8EjlLmZdNYBKJdIN, Db%21%7E%7E_1.JPG

Thanks,

DougOthers have already chimed in, but not only is the logo wrong, but the shirt's too white. They wore a cream-color at home. The numbers are too small as well.
http://images.footballfanatics.com/productImages/_120000/altImages/FF_120873ALT1_xl.jpg

soxfandoug
06-06-2009, 10:52 AM
I know Mitchell and Ness is supposed to be authentic, but I definitely question that. Look at these two 1985 M&N jerseys, Carlton Fisk and Tom Seaver. I see three pretty big differences:

The Fisk has the name on the back, the Seaver doesn't.

The numbers on the back of the Fisk jersey are HUGE, on the Seaver jersey they are regular size.

The Fisk jersey has the 75th anniversary patch on the left sleeve, the Seaver has it on the right sleeve.

Which one of these accurately represents the 1985 home jersey?

http://www.mitchellandness.com/images/products/medium/00314H72_W.jpg

http://www.mitchellandness.com/images/products/medium/WS85H41_W.jpg

hi im skot
06-06-2009, 09:34 PM
I know Mitchell and Ness is supposed to be authentic, but I definitely question that. Look at these two 1985 M&N jerseys, Carlton Fisk and Tom Seaver. I see three pretty big differences:

The Fisk has the name on the back, the Seaver doesn't.

The numbers on the back of the Fisk jersey are HUGE, on the Seaver jersey they are regular size.

The Fisk jersey has the 75th anniversary patch on the left sleeve, the Seaver has it on the right sleeve.

Which one of these accurately represents the 1985 home jersey?

http://www.mitchellandness.com/images/products/medium/00314H72_W.jpg

http://www.mitchellandness.com/images/products/medium/WS85H41_W.jpg

M & N should be authentic (assuming it's not a knock-off), but occasionally they drop the ball.

The 1985 jerseys had the name on the back, and the left sleeve had the patch.

http://caimages.collectors.com/psaimages/1161/04715852/2upresize.jpg

soxfandoug
06-07-2009, 11:13 PM
How does this Fisk jersey look? It looks pretty decent to me, but you guys seem to be much more knowledgeable. It is from eBay seller "jadgang", who seems to sell a ton of jerseys. There is no patch on the sleeve, though.

http://www.jadgang.com/mtbfisk.jpg

hi im skot
06-07-2009, 11:56 PM
How does this Fisk jersey look? It looks pretty decent to me, but you guys seem to be much more knowledgeable. It is from eBay seller "jadgang", who seems to sell a ton of jerseys. There is no patch on the sleeve, though.



His jerseys all appear to be legit. I'm slightly hesitant since the jersey is missing the sleeve patch, but it's possible that Majestic is selling them without the '85 patch now.

You can find those patches online and at Grandstand, so it's no biggie to add it after the purchase.

For the price, I'd go for it.

pasquasroachclip
06-08-2009, 12:51 AM
The Fisk jersey is legit. They started selling those last year without the patch. The big difference is that the new ones are not double knit, but a cotton/poly blend.

hi im skot
06-08-2009, 10:17 AM
The Fisk jersey is legit. They started selling those last year without the patch. The big difference is that the new ones are not double knit, but a cotton/poly blend.

I thought I noticed that at Grandstand this weekend, but I didn't look long enough to notice the patch was missing.

PKalltheway
06-08-2009, 10:20 AM
Same question as my original post, different jersey. Does this look right? I'm mostly concerned with the material... it almost looks shiny!

http://i.ebayimg.com/20/%21BTo,P5%21%21mk%7E$%28KGrHgoOKiUEjlLmV5L+BKJdIhJ %292g%7E%7E_1.JPG

http://i.ebayimg.com/05/%21BTo,L0%21%212k%7E$%28KGrHgoOKi8EjlLmZdNYBKJdIN, Db%21%7E%7E_1.JPG

Thanks,

Doug
Haha, I have that exact Aparicio jersey you have pictured. As a previous poster said, you do get what you pay for with that jersey. But hell, I still wear it anyway.:tongue:

soxfandoug
06-08-2009, 03:59 PM
Thanks for all of the input guys. I think I will order one of those Fisk jerseys.

I ended buying an authentic Luis Aparicio from the Mitchell and Ness site. They had his 1968 home jersey on sale, and I found a coupon code for 25% off, so I ended up getting this bad boy for $131, which doesn't seem too bad for an authentic M&N:

http://www.mitchellandness.com/images/products/medium/WS68H11_W.jpg

soxfandoug
06-20-2009, 05:07 PM
I just wanted to post a follow-up regarding the 1968 Aparicio jersey I ordered. It did arrive last weekend. Mitchell & Ness seem to be VERY inconsistent with their jerseys. This is the picture shown on their website:

http://www.mitchellandness.com/images/products/medium/WS68H11_W.jpg

And this is what I received:

http://chisoxcollector.com/images/jerseys/aparicio_back.jpg

http://chisoxcollector.com/images/jerseys/aparicio_front.jpg

Don't get me wrong, I love the jersey I received. But I am curious as to which is more "authentic"? Did they have names on their 1968 home uniforms?

mzh
06-20-2009, 06:46 PM
http://www.chuckscards.com/1968Topps/68WhiteSox.jpg

This is supposedly the 1968 Sox baseball card set. If you look closely at Tommy John (bottom row, 4th from the right) you can see what appears to be lettering on the back of his jersey.

parlaycard
06-20-2009, 06:51 PM
if you bought that directly from the Mitchell & Ness site, you have a legitimate complaint.

You could go buy a knock off on ebay for $30

I would not let them get away with what they sent you.

If you paid with a credit card, id call your company if M&N is not willing to make your purchase right. I know American Express doesnt mess around with any companies pulling a bait and switch on a customer.

soxfandoug
06-20-2009, 07:02 PM
In looking at those Topps cards mzh linked, it does indeed appear that there are names on the back of the jerseys. However, it also appears that the number appears on the right sleeve, which this M&N jersey doesn't have.

I did purchase this jersey directly from the Mitchell & Ness website. I'm not really upset about it, as it looks like the name should be on the jersey after all. It just makes me question the consistency and authenticity of the M&N brand, which I had always been led to believe was the real deal.

pasquasroachclip
06-20-2009, 08:16 PM
The 1968 jerseys did have names on back and no numbers on the sleeve. The number moved from the sleeve to the chest in 1967. The jersey pictured on the M&N website was probably an older version of the same jersey. When M&N started making throwbacks, they didn't have licencing rights to players names. That's why the 1985 Seaver & Fisk jerseys have no names on back as well.

Brian26
06-20-2009, 09:29 PM
Don't get me wrong, I love the jersey I received. But I am curious as to which is more "authentic"? Did they have names on their 1968 home uniforms?

I actually like the version you received more than the one pictured on the M&N website. Your jersey is more of cream color, which is more authentic than the whiter M&N version. Also, if you look at their photo, the old Sox logo is way too small on the M&N jersey.

ChiMan921
07-24-2009, 12:45 PM
Hi - I have a question for those Sox fans, who like me were in the deserted Comiskey Park in the bad old days of the late 60's.

Does anyone have a picture or a description of the cool 1969 road jersey, the one with the white script "Chicago" with the royal blue border? M&N is selling a replica right now, and the back just doesn't look right. I don't remember any white borders around the numbers and name tag back then. I suspect most of you on-line weren't even born back then, but I can't think of a better place to get a picture or answer than WSI !

Thanks for your help!

russ99
07-24-2009, 05:59 PM
In looking at those Topps cards mzh linked, it does indeed appear that there are names on the back of the jerseys. However, it also appears that the number appears on the right sleeve, which this M&N jersey doesn't have.

I did purchase this jersey directly from the Mitchell & Ness website. I'm not really upset about it, as it looks like the name should be on the jersey after all. It just makes me question the consistency and authenticity of the M&N brand, which I had always been led to believe was the real deal.

Also, remember that those Topps cards back in the day were often retouched, sometimes very heavily. So that shouldn't be gospel.

I prefer the Marc Okkonen drawings here (http://exhibits.baseballhalloffame.org/dressed_to_the_nines/database.htm) from his exceptional book "Baseball Uniforms of the 20th Century" (on my coffee table now) but those only show the fronts.