For new readers: The Treaty of Flushing (War on Black)

Peter wrote this in the comments.  Since I am letting other people fight the battle this weekend…

the losing streak was cruel and unusual punishment for the blue cap army– we finally got our big breakthrough and were able to see our beloved Mets in blue, orange and white for an entire homestand. then- as if the losing streak was not bad enough, we had to stand by as that blue- the official uniform of this team no less- was implicated as a potential cause for the losing by our MANAGER!?

even at our most irrational moment of black uni hatred- never did any follower of this fight or campaign ever posit that the black might be contributing to or losing ways over the past 5 years. but there it was- one homestand- one minor victory for arguably the team’s most dedicated fans– a group that only wants to see it hold true to some sens of tradition– and the the f’ing manager- a previously sensible seeming man if nothing else- proposes that maybe a move back to the black could bring back the winning ways!

cruel and unusual punishment.

this is also known as the moment i lost all respect/hope for terry collins. you know, since we are looking to change our performance by changing clothes– maybe we should try out some philies unis– or better yet yankees unis for a while. the guys who wear those seem to win an awful lot these days.

You know if I’m the Mets, I gotta have at least one meeting about this topic. Maybe we’re all a bunch of morons, but there’s a lot of us morons.  (Read the comments on Uni Watch Flushing executives).

Once again (since there’s lots of new readers here in 2011) I will quickly recap my proposed Treaty of Flushing in which I make great concessions.

1.  5 days a week the Mets wear their traditional dropshadowless uniforms.  White and blue at home.  Gray and blue on the road (with the traditional N E W Y O R K).

2.  Wilpons decide if they want pins or pinless.  And then that’s it.  Stay with it.

3.  I will concede Black Fridays. Since Black sells (so I am told) dress the way you did last night.  With the black cap so we can at least see the NY.  This is a major concession.

4.  Since marketing/merchandise is important – Anything Goes Sundays.  Hawaiian shirts, Los Mets, Negro League throwbacks, camouflage, shorts, pink, orange, blue.  Hell, roll one out every Sunday if MLB will let you (I don’t know how that works).

5.  We all move on to another topic.

I believe this solves all needs (except for fans of hybrid caps which are eliminated).  Is it ideal? No. Does it cause me pain?  Yes. But this war must end.

I still like the idea that we meet in a subway car…I want Supreme Commander of The War On Black Paul Lukas to have the privilege of signing, but Howie Rose should be there too.

Shoot, I thought I wasn’t going to talk about this this weekend.

Uni Watch has a long section on this topic today…a must read for you cats which includes my favorite comment (in the comments): I’m torn on hybrid versus all-black. Kind of like choosing between a root canal and a kick in the crotch.


8 Replies to “For new readers: The Treaty of Flushing (War on Black)”

  1. I agree. Also, going to my first Norfolk Tides game (since the split), to see them play the Bison on Father’s day…

  2. shannon

    if the “treaty of flushing” (lol) would remain in full force and effect and never be broken, and if in upholding the treaty, we’d be guaranteed FIVE FULL DAYS on only blue caps/accoutrements, i might be more willing to be a signee…

    but as terry proved on thursday, “anything to break a losing streak” means fucking with the uniforms, so if you allow “los mets,” negro league throwbacks, hawaiian shirts, etc. to be worn on any given sunday, then who’s to say he wouldn’t break them out on any day? winning is important, but so it tradition — if they can’t win wearing blue caps/sleeves/socks, maybe it’s time to blow the whole unischeme up and start over

    remember 2007 with the rockies and those godawful black vests? winning streaks, even those of the two-game variety, breed suspicions

    all the mets need to do now is to go on a decent winning streak in black — if the treaty of flushing, in effect locking in black at least once per week at home — they’d be far too tempted to wear the black anytime

    nay, tis better to continue the #waronblack (i prefer #ditchtheblack) and eradicate it once and forever from the colorscheme

  3. Please note that today’s Uni Watch commentary is not from Paul Lukas, rather from his weekend correspondent Phil Hecken. However, presume the sentiment regarding inclusion of the black is identical.
    Still, as I have stated plenty of times previously, I am happy for inclusion of the black, for the sake of the Giants (even if this was a marketing scheme in 1998, it is something that should have happened in 1962). Black is now, and has been part of the Mets colors for 1/3 of their history. It defines the eras of Piazza, Reyes and Wright much the way that racing stripes defined Strawberry, Gooden, Hernandez and Carter. Except the black looks far better (and goes better clothing the public wears) than racing stripes ever did. We die-hard fans appreciate the blue and orange (though, truthfully, we may wish for a darker hue of blue), but it doesn’t match many things the casual fan is likely to buy or wear in public, hence the marketing inclusion of black. I do not see it being eliminated, nor a Treaty of Flushing being signed any time soon in a subway car.

    1. yes, today’s column was penned by me, and i won’t presume to speak for paul, but i’m pretty sure he feels the same way

      the difference between paul and I (and i would suspect the good folks at MP) is that we don’t really give a fuck whether the uniform goes with people’s street clothing — the point of the uniform is to outfit the TEAM not the fans

      the black in the mets uniform has NOTHING TO DO WITH THE GIANTS, and anyone who claims so is not only making a specious (at best) claim, but uttering a falsehood at worst…as paul himself said:

      “They did NOT take black from the Giants. That was (and for some folks still is) a back-door rationalization. Just a coincidence. Total BFBS.”

      and just because 1/3 of the mets history happens to include black, 2/3rds does not…it was not originally a mets color, plain and simple

      i will agree that if you want to wear fanboy gear, authentics or replicas, yes, black does go better with your street clothes — but the point of a uniform is not, nor should it EVER be, simply to sell shit to the public…and despite their success in the racing stripes, i personally detested them — but at least they were in royal and orange

      it may “define” the era of piazza, reyes and wright just as the houston astros tequila sunrises defined nolan ryan, or the bumblebee pirates defined willie stargell and kent tekulve…doesn’t mean either of those two uniform iterations defined the pirates or astros long term — hell, the white sox wore two of the more garish (but distinctive) uniforms in a 12 year period (the early 20th centruy fauxbacks and the beach blanket bingo‘s that followed — but would you say either of those uniforms defined the white sox?

      you may want a more fan-friendly look for your team if you wish to wear their jersey around…and indeed the mets no doubt want to tap into the lucrative market that is jersey & paraphernalia sales…

      but to say black is part of the mets uniform history is true — but what is not true is that it was added for any other reason than because it was trendy … it was NOT done as a nod to the giants, in any way, shape or form

      1. First off, 14 into 50 is 28%, so the 1/3rd claim is exaggerated. In reality, it’s a little less than 3/10s of the club’s history, which doesn’t sound nearly as impressive.

        Secondly, Phil, even as good as Lukas’ word is, you don’t even have to rely on it on the Giants thing. Scattered about this site are various 2nd-hand reports of and quotes directly from the Mets’ Dave Howard openly stating black is purely a sales/marketing gimmick without even so much as a half-arsed attempt to sell it as a nod to the Giants.

        Also just FYI on the spam queue, if you post a comment with multiple links, the filter trips so it stays in limbo for a bit (I think Shannon has to manually OK it). I had that happen to me a while back, too.

        1. thanks sparks!

          note to self: don’t post multiple links

          im not real good with numbers, so i just accepted 1/3 as gospel … regardless, the point remains the same: it may be a de facto mets color, but it was not for the first 36 years of the franchise AND it was not ever used as a “nod” to the giants

          black-loving fans can justify it anyway they want, but it was a trendy decision motivated by profit

          over on UW the other day (not in Saturday’s main article) i pontificated that two “problems” arose for those of us who detest black — it basically replaced the ill-fated ice cream cap (the black literally replaced the white), a move that resonated with fans, and they became quite good in 1998 — in fact, one could argue 1999-2000 were their two best seasons, in that they reached the playoffs both years and the world series in 2000

          as such, there are a lot of good memories associated with the black, especially among the younger fans — to them that IS the mets; this same sentiment (albeit for a different generation) is one of the reasons the racing stripes are generally viewed so favorably by a number of fans — 1986 — but that was a GODAWFUL uniform…racing stripes are bad enough but to put them on a pullover and with pinstripes violates every rule of taste

          still…they won in them…so the crappiness of the uniform is outweighed by the success in it

Comments are closed.