Skip to content

High socks, or no high socks; that is the question

Aug 29, 2011, 12:04 PM EDT

Joe Blanton

Michael Vitez of the Philly Inquirer has a fun story today about the never-ending battle in baseball between those who like to wear high socks — the avatars of goodness and truth — and those who don’t — evil incarnate.

OK, that was a bit of editorializing on my part. Apologies. I’m sure there are some non-evil people out there who like the big baggy pants hanging down below the shoes look. I just haven’t met them yet.

And to be honest, I do think that there is a danger that the big high-socks look has become a too self-consciously retro choice by now. No, it’s not like a ton of guys really rock it, but many who do seem to be doing it less because it’s cool and more because it’s perceived to be cool.  If that makes any sense.

Know what you don’t see much of anymore?  The intermediate look.  Anyone doing that? With the stirrups?  That’s probably the coolest look of them all. At least until too many start to do it and it becomes lame.

Man, hipster fashion politics are difficult.

  1. paperlions - Aug 29, 2011 at 12:08 PM

    Brendan Ryan used to rock the stirrups all the time

    http://t3.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcTQWCyJhzFZzhCISDDoMJ–6INRxPGe5QFcPZE25gXy4bnctc6G

    http://cache.daylife.com/imageserve/023taYv0YbefO/610x.jpg

  2. halladaysbiceps - Aug 29, 2011 at 12:13 PM

    I read the article on the high socks this morning on philly.com. My take? Filler garbage for a newspaper that is on borderline bankruptcy. They got rid of almost all their good writers thoughout the last few years and the people of Philly have been subjected to these stupid articles.

    Michael Vitez? Never heard of him. Must be another new 21 year old kid new hire that they just brought in.

    • bloodysock - Aug 29, 2011 at 12:27 PM

      Um. Vitez is 54 and is a Pulitzer Prize winning journalist and published author.

      He’s written for the Inquirer since 1985.

      • halladaysbiceps - Aug 29, 2011 at 1:15 PM

        You are a Boston guy. You wiki’d that lookup and posted it just to make me look bad. You are a winner. I didn’t look it up. I didn’t need to. I know my Philly sports writers, and he he not one of them. Never has been.

        By the way, the guy is not a sports writer.

      • bloodysock - Aug 29, 2011 at 1:19 PM

        I don’t have to wiki anything to make you look bad.

        Never said he was a sports writer either.

    • Chris Fiorentino - Aug 29, 2011 at 12:41 PM

      ouch bicepts…that is a pretty epic fail. Dude’s been around forever.

      • halladaysbiceps - Aug 29, 2011 at 12:45 PM

        Never heard of him. He must have been the most under the radar writer I have ever seen. Bill Conlin is the staple in Philly, not Vitez. Did he come from another city recently?

      • Chris Fiorentino - Aug 29, 2011 at 1:07 PM

        It’s understandable because if you only read the sports pages, then you probably never heard of him. He isn’t a sports writer…more of a general jack-of-all-trades guy. But he’s pretty good. He wrote a book on the idiots who come to Philly to run on the steps like Rocky did…I never read it and it’s probably pretty good. But I just can’t past the dopes who come to the city just to run the steps of the Art Museum. But that’s probably just me.

      • halladaysbiceps - Aug 29, 2011 at 1:07 PM

        From wiki:

        “Vitez has written for the Philadelphia Inquirer since 1985 and is known for his human-interest stories. In 1997, Vitez, along with Inquirer photographers April Saul and Ron Cortes, was awarded the Pulitzer Prize in Explanatory Journalism for a series of articles he wrote on end-of-life care, telling the stories of terminally ill patients who wished to die with dignity.”

        He’s not a known sports writer. He is a non-sports writer. My point proven. Who cares what he writes about high-socks in baseball? Stupid article. Just shows you how cash strapped the Inquirer is. They bring in a non-sports writer to write a sports article.

    • Jonny 5 - Aug 29, 2011 at 1:32 PM

      Did your house flood or something bicepts? You’re moving up to a 10.0 on the a-wipe scale today man…

      • Chris Fiorentino - Aug 29, 2011 at 1:36 PM

        J5, I think it is lack of Phillies games to be honest. It’s like crack to some, including myself, but it’s like I have the patch working because I have been watching my DVD’s of the 2008 World Series since Saturday afternoon. I think he’ll be fine tomorrow after getting to watch the game tonight.

      • Jonny 5 - Aug 29, 2011 at 1:43 PM

        Chris, lol!! Yeah, I started twitching over the weekend without any baseball myself. IDK what’s up his butt, he’s pretty much gone all offensive on me for some reason “see buck thread”. I’ll just chalk it up to douchnozzlery and leave it at that.

      • halladaysbiceps - Aug 29, 2011 at 1:43 PM

        Jonny,

        I’m out of here today. Nothing to do with you. That St. Louis guy in the last thread (Joe Buck post) really pissed me off today, along with a couple of new characters that I have not seen before comment here. It didn’t help today that you added to what I preceived as against me in the thread. Nothing against you, brother. Take care.

      • Jonny 5 - Aug 29, 2011 at 1:47 PM

        Bicepts, I was trying to explain it wasn’t a singular feeling you have about Buck. 75% of Phillies fans would agree with you (if they were around for the 2008 nlcs anyway). I don’t see how that many people can be wrong really. Anyway, whatever….

      • halladaysbiceps - Aug 29, 2011 at 1:52 PM

        Agreed, Jonny. I need to take a few days off this site anyways. You are right. I was being a dick. Sometimes when a person gets as passionate about baseball as I do, it’s hard to hold it all in.

        Sorry about the other thread, Jonny. Hopefully, we will BS in the later part of the week. Take care, fellow Phillies fan.

  3. Roger Moore - Aug 29, 2011 at 12:14 PM

    What I don’t like is that the teams mix it up, with some players going for the high socks and some going for the low. I think they should get together as a team, decide on one style or the other, and go with it as a group. I thought it rocked when the Indians went with high socks for Jim Thome’s birthday, won, and decided to stick with it for the rest of the season as a good luck charm.

    • nolanwiffle - Aug 29, 2011 at 12:17 PM

      Precisely! It’s a uniform….there should (by definition) be uniformity. Intermediate with stirrups is the way to go.

  4. Old Gator - Aug 29, 2011 at 12:16 PM

    No high socks. They look like cleated Pooh pajamas.

  5. Jonny 5 - Aug 29, 2011 at 12:33 PM

    Jamie Moyer wears stirrups. “wore stirrups” I guess if his dream of coming back is fulfilled the first statement could stand. He also calls his baseball pants Pantaloons or knickers.

  6. Joe - Aug 29, 2011 at 12:34 PM

    Love the stirrup look.

  7. SmackSaw - Aug 29, 2011 at 12:37 PM

    High socks. Stirrup showing

  8. cerowb - Aug 29, 2011 at 12:38 PM

    Love the high socks! It didn’t get any better than Curtis Granderson rocking the high dark-blue socks when he was playing for the Tigers. Combine those classic white home jerseys with the English D and a pair of high socks…that is uniform perfection.

  9. cur68 - Aug 29, 2011 at 12:39 PM

    If I had to choose: I’d take the long pants. Ryan Howard’s bang on: it’s like sweat pants that way. Same thing with scrubs. Sweats/jammies. Ahhh sweat pants, the slacker’s uniform. Every time I haul on the puce scrubs for work I fell like I’m tipping my hat to my inner slacker. Then I go spend 12 hours sprinting around and wish I’d never got off the couch and went to school much less got a job and been all responsible. Baseball players got it made. Wear the slacker outfit for work, play a game, get paid millions and date Minka Kelley till you get tired of dating Minka Kelley then move on to another version, all the while working in your sweat pants. Why did I go to school again?

    • Jonny 5 - Aug 29, 2011 at 1:19 PM

      I’m with you Cur. I think that all that elastic bunching up at my knees is kind of uncomfortable.

  10. jimbo1949 - Aug 29, 2011 at 12:42 PM

    I blame/recognize the Beatles. All the bands dressed themselves alike back in the day. Then the Beatles started doing their own individual thing, can’t remember when exactly, then everybody else followed. Sort of conformist non-conformist. I don’t remember when baseball uniforms changed, I’d like to think Charley O and the brightly colored A’s softball style uniforms, but I just don’t remember.
    .
    I’m partial to the just below the knee bloused pants with stirrups, sanitary hose, and black spikes. I’d also like you kids to get the hell off my lawn.

    • nolanwiffle - Aug 29, 2011 at 12:58 PM

      Yesterday, all the players seemed to dress the same
      Now the unis look so awfully lame
      Oh why oh why are we to blame

      -The Beatles

      • jimbo1949 - Aug 29, 2011 at 3:01 PM

        I really hesitated and was torn on the word: blame, I tried to soften it with the slash. Sharkskin suits and skinny ties were alright in their time but….jeans and T shirts are more comfortable.
        Long pants in the summer? I’d rather wear shorts.
        .
        So how come football players wear short pants?

      • nolanwiffle - Aug 29, 2011 at 3:30 PM

        Because

        -The Beatles

    • sanitaries - Jan 7, 2013 at 6:08 AM

      Do u wear the sanitary socks? I do

  11. Mr. Jason "El Bravo" Heyward - Aug 29, 2011 at 12:57 PM

    Manny is who I think of, when I think of the “modern” sockless look. Badasses don’t wear the socks out…prima donnas do.

  12. sdelmonte - Aug 29, 2011 at 12:58 PM

    The obvious solution is one high sock and one low sock.

    • nolanwiffle - Aug 29, 2011 at 1:02 PM

      You say you want a revolution…..?

  13. nategearhart - Aug 29, 2011 at 1:57 PM

    “…those who like to wear high socks — the avatars of goodness and truth…
    http://1.bp.blogspot.com/_wZ8oOAKpmXY/SZwcl7nHiQI/AAAAAAAAAJ4/1MeoMbiWpuo/s400/arod_steroids.jpg

    …and those who don’t — evil incarnate…
    http://images.paraorkut.com/img/baseball/images/d/derek_jeter-409.jpg

    Mind: blown.

    • Chris Fiorentino - Aug 29, 2011 at 2:14 PM

      i love how “steroids” is in the filename name for a-rod…classic.

  14. garlicfriesandbaseball - Aug 29, 2011 at 3:52 PM

    The ultimate sock? It’s the Barry Zito sock…….full sock with team-color-stripes at the top! Whoa!

  15. clydeserra - Aug 29, 2011 at 3:54 PM

    Josh Outman with the A’s

    http://a.espncdn.com/photo/2009/0520/pg2_a_outman_576.jpg

    • clydeserra - Aug 29, 2011 at 3:55 PM

      And I think he gets some support sometimes

      http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2597/3678334336_ae5c333019_o.jpg

  16. FC - Aug 29, 2011 at 4:04 PM

    between those who like to wear high socks — the avatars of goodness and truth — and those who don’t — evil incarnate.

    So THAT’s why you hate Ryan Howard… (I kid :D )

  17. addictedzone - Aug 29, 2011 at 4:21 PM

    Let us not forget Juan Pierre.

    http://www.fistedfoul.com/storage/184_8426_JuanPierre.jpg?__SQUARESPACE_CACHEVERSION=1284396286831

    He of high baggy pants and low stirrups as he prepares to practice his fantasy air bunting in the outfield before games. Watched him go through this routine before game 2 of the 2003 World Series and it’s some of the finest pre-game player entertainment you will find.

Leave Comment

You must be logged in to leave a comment. Not a member? Register now!

Featured video

Jackie Robinson Day is bittersweet
Top 10 MLB Player Searches
  1. T. Wood (5092)
  2. S. Kazmir (4778)
  3. J. Kubel (4625)
  4. K. Uehara (4037)
  5. I. Nova (3980)
  1. G. Springer (3063)
  2. T. Walker (3020)
  3. M. Moore (2951)
  4. M. Machado (2848)
  5. J. Chavez (2827)