The new MLB Houston Astros manager, Bo Porter, ordered names being kept off unis in the spring. He says all jobs are up for grabs, and at this point it's more important for unis to carry Astros then individuals names, but several days before their opener, when spots have been won and the roster set, then names will be sewn on unis.
   Sounds sensible. In the spring, our unis could omit names but days before the opener names could be attached to Army unis.

I don't think we will see names on the Army Football uniforms anytime soon or longer.
The reason is .... I don't have a reason and I really don't think the authorities care.
I do know one thing. It helps the fans recognize whose who on the team. Very unenjoyable for me tring to find out who scored, who had a good day, etc.
It is very difficult looking thru your program during the game action. You usually miss the next play.
They want you to buy a program but I do anyway.

The names on the uniforms, be it baseball or football, are for the benefit of those watching the game, not for the players.  

If you don't care about the fans, then don't worry about putting names on uniforms.  It just adds extra cost.

Me, I love names on uniforms.  I'd love to see Army follow the XFL example, and have a "He Hate Me" toting the rock.  

I miss the XFL. They get a bad rap for having a goofy marketing scheme and being inextricably linked to pro wrestling, but they pioneered a lot of technologies used in the NFL and college ball today. And the play on the field was not bad at all. It was at least comparable to the USFL and WFL of yesteryear.

Obviously then, they (the authorities) don't care about us, the fans.

BulldogDad wrote: Me, I love names on uniforms.  I'd love to see Army follow the XFL example, and have a "He Hate Me" toting the rock.  

Examples for Army: "Neck Back", "The Daze", "Smirk Off", "Sally Port", "Big Bites". "Pop Off", "2 Dash 1".

Beat Navy!

Instead of the name WEST POINT on the back of every jersey (which everybody knows in the first place), why not put the name of each player on each jersey (which nobody knows in the first place).
I guess common sense isn't a factor in this case.

RABBLE wrote: Instead of the name WEST POINT on the back of every jersey (which everybody knows in the first place), why not put the name of each player on each jersey (which nobody knows in the first place).
I guess common sense isn't a factor in this case.

I love names on the jerseys.  However, in this day and age, I doubt that many people know anything about West Point or Annapolis - not that it really matters.

The Army/Navy game is still important because it is Army/Navy; not, West Point/Annapolis.

RABBLE wrote:  (which nobody knows in the first place)

wrong

No way the caliber of play in the XFL approached  the USFL.  The USFL signed 3-straight Heisman Trophy winners, competed so intensely with the NFL for talent that it shifted the NFL salary structure, and 187 USFL players played in the NFL.  USFL players included Jim Kelly, Steve Young, Reggie White, Herschel Walker, Maurice Carthon, Doug William, Sam Mills, Kelvin Bryant, Bart Oates, Flutie, Mike Rozier, Sean Landeta, Keith Millard, Bobby Hebert, Craig James and Anthony Carter to name a few.

The USFL was quality football.

The NFL throws money at all these upstart leagues of the past like the AAFC of the 1940's, the USFL, the XFL, the AFL and all of a sudden they disappear.
How about suing the NFL as a combination in restraint of trade and utilize the Sherman anti-trust Laws that this country is supposed to have?
Money talks. Laws walk.

The "goal" of many rival leagues is to survive long enough and be sufficiently successful to merge with the incumbent league. Occasionally, this is effected as a merger of equals, such as the American Football League of the 1960s, or as more often is the case, the incumbent league allowing more successful franchises to merge. 

In the case of the American Basketball Association (4 teams: Nets, Spurs, Pacers and Nuggets were subsumed by the NBA, paying $3.2 million entry fee. The Kentucky Colonels owner John Y. Brown agreed to fold his franchise for $3+ million and the right to purchase a controlling interest in an NBA franchise (the Buffalo Braves; one season later he swapped franchises with Celtics owner Irv Levin, and became part owner of the Celts with Harry Mangurian.  Levin quickly moved the Braves to San Diego.  Stern negotiated these moves when he was the league's general counsel.), and the Spirits of St. Louis owners, the Silnas, were bought out by the 4 merging ABA franchises with the promise to receive a share of each 4 team's broadcast revenues in perpetuity.

Same with the AAFC -- when they merged with the NFL in 1949, the NFL accepted the Cleveland Browns, the San Francisco 49ers, and the Baltimore Colts, with the AAFC Los Angeles Dons merging with the Los Angeles Rams.  The Buffalo Bills, New York Yankees and Chicago Hornets AAFC franchises folded.

The American Football League survived for a couple reasons: the NFL left too many attractive cities unoccupied (leaving many prospective owners eager to purchase a franchise in the AFL), and the AFL negotiated a favorable TV deal with ABC.  The AFL did bring an antitrust lawsuit against the NFL, but it was dismissed in 1962.

The USFL was also somewhat successful in playing spring football, although over-expansion and high player payroll expenses hurt the league.  The USFL also sued the NFL on antitrust grounds, and won! The USFL was awarded damages of $1, which were tripled to $3.  The most harmful element to the USFL was NJ Generals owner Donald Trump, who led the charge for the USFL to go head-to-head with the NFL by playing football in the fall.  Trump hoped that the NFL would accept the NJ Generals, either through a larger USFL merger or simply as an "expansion" franchise.

.

Well, we can't blame Rab for hi-jacking this thread.

Noticed today that NASCAR is putting drivers' names on the front windshield of the cars.      

I always find names on uniforms add to my enjoyment of watching football on TV.  With HD and large flat screen TVs, I can actually read the names easily as I watch games.  For 20 years, I had season tickets and didn't really need names on uniforms for Army players because I knew who the majority of players were and knew their uniform number.  Now that is not the case.  Names on the uniforms would be a big help for fans such as me.  I am sure there are still fans at the stadium who don't need names on the uniforms and they can be hard to read from the stands anyway, but for TV viewers, the names are a plus.

Of course, names should be put on jerseys. As a matter of fact the NCAA should order it.
How about socks too so the team looks like a team instead of everybody wearing socks, no socks. Uniformity of football gear makes a team just look better, especially as a PR move and for the increased enjoyment of the fans.
Will Army do it? No they won't because things of this nature is just not a pressing matter to the authorities, just the season ticket sales and obviously little else as you observe on game day.
Right or wrong?