Nathan

That's not bland, that's just a contrived and transparent money grab. The worst part of the Cavs' title in 2016 was that they won while wearing uniforms that looked like recycled high school warmups, and Raptors wearing garbage this year with their title. The NBA's issue is that there is no consistency and no real way of doing things. The NHL says that a team can wear one style of white jersey and one style of dark jersey during the entirety of the playoffs; the NBA would allow a team to wear five different styles in five NBA Finals games. Nike leads them around by the nose, and this is what we get.

I remember seeing the River City Sports ads in THN that showed the new IHL and AHL jerseys when they were released, and having one of many "Whoa!" moments when looking at them during the mid 1990s. I'm of the opinion that the best reaction one can get to a new jersey is "whoa!", whether good or bad. The Monarchs and the Grand Rapids Griffins were the ones that really stood out to me as being terrific designs, the former for various reasons and the latter for both the color and the winged shoulders. Monopolization is what killed this, and a push from too many people in charge who forget that half of the term "professional sports" is "sports". It's supposed to be fun! Baseball is fun! Hockey is fun! Football is fun! Have fun with it! The idea that team uniforms are supposed to be boring and professional is so antithetical to this that I can't fathom why being bland is so popular.

It's a great story, but he had nothing to do with why those were never done. Also, he did acquire Pavol Demitra for Christer Olsson.

It's been like that for years. I have an old Michael Dean Perry Browns jersey from 1988 or 1989, and he was listed at 6'1" and about 290. The jersey is maybe the size of a youth t-shirt, and it has slits cut into the side of so that a lace could be run through it and cinched down.

The switch from 1.0 to 2.0 was a phase-in process that spanned multiple seasons, depending on team and multiple factors. It began in 2007-08, and was pretty much done by 2010-11, although some holdouts like Martin Erat continued with a 1.0 past that point. Most teams continued using 1.0 in the preseason just because they had the stock on hand, but that's not across the board.

Pro Player was a subsidiary of Fruit of the Loom, which went into bankruptcy in December 1999. The Pro Player line itself went belly-up in either February or early March 2000, which threw everything into chaos. That CCM would have swooped in and made at least a handful of jerseys according to various specs is not unexpected. I own a white Oilers CCM jersey with tail tagging and a silver shield, and they too were a team that used Pro Player in 1999-00.

That's exactly what it is. CCM jerseys made in early 2000 had tail tagging, and ones made later in the year (and going forward from then) had this removed and the logo on the back of the neck. You can occasionally find Columbus and Minnesota jerseys that have CCM on the tail.

A few years ago, I picked up an old uncrested Cleveland Lumberjacks that someone had added a goofy skull and crossbones patch to the front of. The price was decent enough. I get it in my hands, and it turns out that the dumbass I bought it from had actually removed the Lumberjacks crest completely, thrown it away, and replaced it with something that looked like it came from a Harley dealer. Not only that, it looks and feels like it was put on there using a hydraulic press. I think I've used a pint of acetone trying to get it off there, and have only succeeded in peeling the perimeter up from the edges.

Is it a French 100-year patch, or English?

The only picture I've found of Savard against the Kings from that season with him wearing white was from the regular season. It's the one of him and Luc Robitaille, but you can see the Stanley Cup 100th patch on Robitaille and sort of make out the All-Star patch on Savard.

The game that Savard played was Game 1, which was in Montreal and had the Habs wearing their usual home whites.

The story is true, the motive may not be.

I have a late-1980s Penguins jersey with 66s on it, which all looks to be accurate. The problem is that it has a screened crest on airknit, which is correct for 1987-88. But the sewn twill numbers, in addition to the placement of said numbers, didn't start until 1988-89 - which was an ultrafil jersey. So my quandary is whether to strip off the numbers and have everything re-done according to the original on-ice specs, which to me were hideous. Or I can keep it as it is, which looks significantly nicer even though it does create a material/accuracy mismatch. Or I can pick up a sewn twill crest and include that when I sell/trade it., without actually sewing it down or placing it. Thoughts? First is 1987-88, second is 1988-89

Nah, it was because a bunch of Penguins fans got liquored up in, grabbed onto him, and either thrusting or grinding on him. I think that was the 8th day after Boomer made his first in-game appearance, so I'd imagine that they were simply excited for Boomer's bris.

They were first worn the day after Thanksgiving, which I believe was a home game against Detroit. The unveiling was the day before Thanksgiving, during the intermission of a road game against the Islanders.