In 1992, the Phillies and Cardinals opted for updated versions of what they had pre-1970. I remember the phrase "classic" being showered down on them in praise, as if classic equaled idyllic 1950s or before Astroturf kicked in altogether. Thus is a Padres uniform that is in that style "classic" or is Padres classic the brown and yellow look that declared "Padres"? Eye of the beholder and all that. I was fond, aesthetically, of the oversized, wavy P the Phils sported even when I disliked them intensely. I also kind of like what they have now. (I hate that I like anything about them.) Expos went to that kind of "classic" iteration in 1992 and it wasn't classic for them. Glad the Mets added numbers on the front in 1965, though if I'd been around in 1962, I might have found it an affront. Was surprised when orange buttons were added that they weren't already there. As soon as they arrived, they made all the sense in the world to me. Still say the names on the backs of the home uniforms currently don't look quite right. It might be the absence of the shadow. Everything else currently is suave, smooth, what have you. 42: In the course of a JR Day game, I change my mind 42 times. "Nice tribute." "Overkill." "No, it's the right thing to do." "This is ridiculous." It's just one day is my conclusion, and I can take intention over execution for one day. Every batter looks to me like Butch Huskey, every pitcher Ron Taylor. That's not a line. I really do see those two guys. Not McDowell, not R. Hodges.