• Content count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by CLEstones

  1. 2017 NBA Offseason

    The Cavs did ask... and it got turned down immediately. I guess you didn't bring it up. I think I saw your username and blocked out or got mixed up with someone else. My apologies.
  2. 2017 NBA Offseason

    Calm down. The only thing Boston did was expand their window by getting Kyrie (and hoping to resign him). Boston basically traded IT, Crowder, and Bradley for Hayward and Irving. I'm not sure that's that big of an upgrade. Their scoring should be up, but that's going to be about it. I love Kyrie (he is, or was, my favorite player in the league), but I don't think you are going to see much growth from Brown and Tatum with Kyrie on the floor and Hayward being the #2. It was still a great move for Boston, but it doesn't put them in the discussion with the Cavs and contending this year unless IT AND Rose both go down for the season and Love gets traded. First and foremost, Bledsoe and Jackson was never on the table, so its stupid to even bring up. Second, if you are concerned about IT's injury, then you better be MORE concerned with Bledsoe's long injury history... especially when the doctor's believe IT's hip just needed rest. That's no where near what Bledsoe has been under. It's crazy to think this trade has made the Cavs better in the long term AND the short term. There is no scoring drop off with IT, possibly even more scoring. His defense is probably worse - which is really saying something. Its a 1 year deal, which fits in the LeBron speculation. Its saves the Cavs a ton of money in tax. The Cavs also get Crowder, who is a great 3 n D guy for multiple years... which is a significant upgrade over Derrick Williams and Richard Jefferson and maybe even Iman Shumpert. They also finally get a versatile 4th big man. Throw that on top of the Nets draft pick, which, is sure to be top 5. TL;DR Its a great move by both teams.
  3. Cleveland Browns re-do in the works for 2020?

    I don't know. I'm not the most creative person nor do I have time/energy/talent to hammer out some ideas. But there are people around here who do have the time/energy/talent and have come up with good concepts. I'm not sure Paul Brown's family would approve, either, but I would at least try and mend the relationship. It should have been mended long ago, anyway. He's arguably the greatest coach of all time, AND your namesake. It should be an honor to have him as part of the organization. As I said, I think there is some room to explore a Paul Brown/Jim Brown logo... What it is, I don't know. I just think the Browns need to pick either the elf or the bulldog and stick with it. Create a wordmark/primary logo with either the elf or dog, create a secondary logo with the same subject, and then they can still incorporate the remaining elf/dog as a tertiary logo. The primary would be a more detailed representation, the secondary would be a minimalized version for replication and small spaces.
  4. Cleveland Browns re-do in the works for 2020?

    The Bears and/or Giants logos are a poor example. Those logos are iconic, they have historical backing, they have a proud tradition. The =B= has none of that... it has the exact opposite. I think the Browns can develop a true logo, whether its a dog, an elf, or mending the relationship with Paul Brown's family. I think there is even room to explore something with Paul Brown and Jim Brown. I don't have a logo I can post or a concept I created. But I've been a member of this board long enough to see plenty of logos go through here that destroy the =B= logo. In my personal opinion, the franchise is too concerned with our moronic fanbase and "doing right by them," instead of just picking and identity and sticking with it. They have made strides to that end, but just like everything else the Browns do, they find way to screw it up.
  5. Cleveland Browns re-do in the works for 2020?

    I'm not sure what to tell you, but you pretty much have this all wrong. I was saying the =B= logo was objectively terrible, somewhat tongue in cheek, somewhat sarcastic. The other member of the conversation argued that I didn't know the difference between subjective and objective. I never called anyone dense for disagreeing with my opinion on a logo. I called someone dense for thinking I didn't know the difference between objective and subjective, thus not picking up on the sarcasm in the comment. It WAS me who first used "dense" in a comment, the other member did not. Furthermore, I did not snap, in the slightest. I kept it reasonable civil, in my *subjective* opinion. Therefore, you 100% DID quote me out of context/ignorance. This should sufficiently end this portion of the conversation. Clearly, the OPINION of something is based in subjectivity... but there are also OBJECTIVE aspects of the logo that make it terrible.
  6. The Mad Scientist's NBA - Hawks added

    Flip the taper on the shorts so, in combination with the taper on the top, alludes to a honeycomb. It will make the primaries more consistent with the secondaries.
  7. Cleveland Browns re-do in the works for 2020?

    I would recommend reading the entirety of the conversation to understand what the "dense" comment was referring to before quoting someone out of context and out of ignorance, around here.
  8. Cleveland Browns re-do in the works for 2020?

    Wow. I would describe that as reaching. No disrespect. Honestly, I could buy all that for Green Bay... Its been around for so long, its their history, it IS their identity. But this clip art Browns logo is weak at best. Its most significant feature is the stripe... which is the same stripe used on plenty of teams across the NFL, college, etc. The =B= isn't strong. It isn't identifiable. If I had any sort of time to do anything these days, I would mock up similar logos for other teams, in different sports, and I think it would help illustrate how bad the logo would be comparatively.
  9. Cleveland Browns re-do in the works for 2020?

    So, you would describe that =B= logo as lively, bright, exciting, and clever? Or would you describe it as plain, dull, uninspired?
  10. Cleveland Browns re-do in the works for 2020?

    EDIT: Deleted. Can a mod delete this. Not getting into a petty argument with "C-Squared."
  11. Cleveland Browns re-do in the works for 2020?

    Are people this dense here? I know the difference between subjective and objective. However, there is nothing saying that both cases can't be true. The logo is NOT unique. It contains basic, generic shapes and letters. It has no historical context (unlike Green Bay's). It has no significant tie to the city or the team. It is boring. It is void of character. Those are all OBJECTIVE truths about the =B= logo.
  12. Cleveland Browns re-do in the works for 2020?

    Its generic. It is not unique. It contains basic, generic shapes and letters. It has no historical context. It has no significant tie to the city or team. Its boring. It has no character. It looks like a grade school logo. Its just flat out a bad logo. Again, this is like the new Phoenix Suns uniforms... for some reason, the Suns' new uniform and the =B= goes against everything people rally and cry about day in and day out, but they are widely loved. Its mind boggling. I'm pretty sure you can go on ClipArt '97 and find that exact =B= logo.
  13. Cleveland Browns re-do in the works for 2020?

    No. Its objectively terrible. Its one of the worst logos in the modern era.
  14. Cleveland Browns re-do in the works for 2020?

    Stop with the =B= logo. Enough already. Its objectively terrible.
  15. College Football Uniforms - 2017 Season

    Is this what the actual throwback looked like? Or is this an UnderArmor amalgamation?
  16. College Football Uniforms - 2017 Season

    I agree. Just because these are the best One-offs Notre Dame has done in a while, doesn't mean much when the bar was low to begin with. In my opinion, the shoulder caps are the most egregious part of these uniforms. The piping and words serve no purpose, as all. At least with the name on back, fans can order custom jerseys for previous players? I don't know. I can deal with the facemask and the logos, since the facemask in a minor design aspect and the logos ARE for a one-off.
  17. NBA Changes 2017-18

    Maybe I'm years late to this... but are the actual yellow colors that different?

    IMG didn't work. Is this the new basketball template?
  19. Phoenix Suns New Uniforms

    Frankly, I am shocked by the affection for the new Suns uniforms. It seemingly goes against what everyone routinely rallies against: Modern, excessively-serif'ed font Similar but different letters and numbers, with contradictory & inconsistent serifs Beveled font Inconsistent design elements Burst on the shorts, with single stripe No burst on the jersey, with double stripes People are killing the Nuggets because their ONLY design flaw is a slightly difficult to read wordmark on ONE jersey... but then are loving the Suns... just because they got rid of black?
  20. Phoenix Suns New Uniforms

    Needs some sort of design element from the shorts tied to the jersey. I don't understand the sunburst on shorts but then truncated stripes down the side of the jersey?
  21. Minnesota Timberwolves

    Loving Minnesota's version of Wizards. Please just go back to the KG-era.
  22. NBA Changes 2017-18

    If the colors are complimentary or don't clash, I think its a great look. The problem is, too many teams force it with poor contrasting colors.
  23. Nuggets unveil new uniforms*

    The whole point I was making is that people over-react to every little thing. These uniforms aren't terrible. Did they make mistakes as far as brand is concerned? Yes. But it doesn't mean the uniform is BAD. They are incredibly consistent and clean - something we all constantly bitch about. One workmark is not easy to read. But that's the only bad design element in the uniforms. And its not THAT hard to read. People are making it sounds like its looking directly into the sun. It takes .5 seconds to read it. They are definitely NOT the worst uniforms from Nike's release.
  24. Nuggets unveil new uniforms*

    Definitely not the worst of the new uniforms... not sure why people are being so dramatic about these. Yes, light blue instead of navy would have been better. And yes, the wordmark strokes should have been revised. But other than that, its a very clean look, its an identifiable look, and they kept the side panels, which is becoming a staple of their brand. I saw people on Twitter and Reddit calling this easily the worst yet... which, if you ask me, of the uniforms that had major changes (not just changing the logo on the waistband), this IS one of the better redesigns.
  25. Cleveland Cavaliers New Uniforms

    Check your mail...