colortv

NFL to Los Angeles Rebranding

Recommended Posts

I HAVE A TEAM THAT IS NEED OF A REBRAND----THE CLEVELAND BROWNS----Our beloved Cleveland Browns left for Baltimore in 1995 (actually February 1996, but anyways). Many Browns fans feel that the franchise has never been the same since Art Modell fired Paul Brown. And then the move happened. I know as Browns fans we fought to keep the name, colors, tradition and history. But here is the reality of the situation, the "expansion" Browns have been a punchline for all other NFL fans and teams since 1999. The new Browns should do the honorable thing like what Tennessee did with the Oilers.....retire the name. The original Browns will forever be remembered for Otto Graham, Jim Brown, and other greats. They will be forever remembered for the legendary Paul Brown and the force they were in the early days of the NFL. I would love for the owner to fire every single talent scout/draft analysis, the GM, and possibly the head coach. Start over with a new name and brings us back to the roots of American football....there were other football teams in Cleveland before the Browns (i.e. Bulldogs 1923-1927, Indians 1931, and Rams 1936-1945).

Start over again as the Cleveland Barons. This way the original Cleveland Browns can continue in our hearts as the league wrecking ball with 4 AAFC Championships and 4 NFL Championships. This 1999 fake copy of the real Browns is a mess

Wouldn't you prefer Bulldogs or Bloodhounds or something canine related? Because nobody in the league really has a canine mascot.

Agreed. Kinda surprised that Bulldogs hasn't been used or kept as a pro football team. Solid name in my book.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I HAVE A TEAM THAT IS NEED OF A REBRAND----THE CLEVELAND BROWNS----Our beloved Cleveland Browns left for Baltimore in 1995 (actually February 1996, but anyways). Many Browns fans feel that the franchise has never been the same since Art Modell fired Paul Brown. And then the move happened. I know as Browns fans we fought to keep the name, colors, tradition and history. But here is the reality of the situation, the "expansion" Browns have been a punchline for all other NFL fans and teams since 1999. The new Browns should do the honorable thing like what Tennessee did with the Oilers.....retire the name. The original Browns will forever be remembered for Otto Graham, Jim Brown, and other greats. They will be forever remembered for the legendary Paul Brown and the force they were in the early days of the NFL. I would love for the owner to fire every single talent scout/draft analysis, the GM, and possibly the head coach. Start over with a new name and brings us back to the roots of American football....there were other football teams in Cleveland before the Browns (i.e. Bulldogs 1923-1927, Indians 1931, and Rams 1936-1945).

Start over again as the Cleveland Barons. This way the original Cleveland Browns can continue in our hearts as the league wrecking ball with 4 AAFC Championships and 4 NFL Championships. This 1999 fake copy of the real Browns is a mess

Wouldn't you prefer Bulldogs or Bloodhounds or something canine related? Because nobody in the league really has a canine mascot.

Agreed. Kinda surprised that Bulldogs hasn't been used or kept as a pro football team. Solid name in my book.

Bulldogs, Tigers, Hawks, Wildcats, etc. are all so generic and college sounding, The pro teams that do have them are all pretty old school, nowadays you just need more from a branding.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If generic names like "Titans" and "Texans" can be resurrected, I think "Bulldogs" would do just fine.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Bulldogs was used for a historical franchise in the same state as the Browns, the Canton Bulldogs. I think it is a good name.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That was my thought. The last two names were resurrecting old NFL identities, the Bulldogs ought to be next.

If there was going to be a team in London - which there won't because the Earth is round - Bulldogs would be a glorious fit.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If generic names like "Titans" and "Texans" can be resurrected, I think "Bulldogs" would do just fine.

... how is "Texans" generic, if I may ask?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If generic names like "Titans" and "Texans" can be resurrected, I think "Bulldogs" would do just fine.

... how is "Texans" generic, if I may ask?

It's like naming a Kansas teams "Kansans". Nevermind the fact that there was also 2 other Texans franchise, one which is in the same league as the current.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Bulldogs was used for a historical franchise in the same state as the Browns, the Canton Bulldogs. I think it is a good name.

Seems like a poor match for the city of Los Angeles tbh... if it ends up being the Chargers, I don't see how whitewashing a semi-local team's identity would make sense... there's already so much value in the Chargers brand, why change it to something clunky like "Bulldogs" to appease the small cross-section of fans who would "get it?"

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Just notified from Bleacher Report's Instagram that the Chargers will file relocation papers for LA. Maybe they will bring back the powder blue?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Just notified from Bleacher Report's Instagram that the Chargers will file relocation papers for LA. Maybe they will bring back the powder blue?

They'll decide on it, but change their minds at the last second because this is the Spanos' we're talking about.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Bulldogs was used for a historical franchise in the same state as the Browns, the Canton Bulldogs. I think it is a good name.

Seems like a poor match for the city of Los Angeles tbh... if it ends up being the Chargers, I don't see how whitewashing a semi-local team's identity would make sense... there's already so much value in the Chargers brand, why change it to something clunky like "Bulldogs" to appease the small cross-section of fans who would "get it?"

None of the three teams would change its name.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Bulldogs was used for a historical franchise in the same state as the Browns, the Canton Bulldogs. I think it is a good name.

Seems like a poor match for the city of Los Angeles tbh... if it ends up being the Chargers, I don't see how whitewashing a semi-local team's identity would make sense... there's already so much value in the Chargers brand, why change it to something clunky like "Bulldogs" to appease the small cross-section of fans who would "get it?"

None of the three teams would change its name.

Agreed. All of the names have been around too long to warrant a change.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If generic names like "Titans" and "Texans" can be resurrected, I think "Bulldogs" would do just fine.

... how is "Texans" generic, if I may ask?

It's like naming a Kansas teams "Kansans". Nevermind the fact that there was also 2 other Texans franchise, one which is in the same league as the current.

That still doesn't tell me how it's "generic". There's only one Texas. There's only one Kansas. There's only one California... it's unique because you can only use it in one place.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Sorry, "generic" wasn't quite the word I was searching for. Maybe "amorphous". Texans is a boring name, and a presumptuous one given that they're virtually guaranteed to always be the second-most-popular team in the state, but I really meant something towards reviving a dormant name.

The last two names are both retreads from earlier NFL teams, both abandoned. So "Bulldogs" would fit that pattern.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Texans is a terrible name, especially since there were several better options on the table. I'd feel silly if I was an out of stater wearing a shirt that just looked like it was in support of some other state's residents. Even assuming everyone knew it was just a football team and not literally Texans, it's silly to think I'm supporting players who (many, at least) aren't Texans and will never be Texans but are called Texans.

Yes, I know Tony Romo isn't literally a cowboy, and Sam Bradford isn't a bird (despite the similarities between his brain and a bird's) but something like "Texans" isn't clearly just a silly mascot / nickname.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I like Texans as a football nickname and I like their logo a lot but I wouldn't have minded Cleveland-dealing the Houston Oilers, an identity I miss more and more as the Titans continue to unravel.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The Texans name is silly but the logo is sweet. Too bad they couldn't have used it for the Houston Toros or something.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Los Angeles already tried using Bulldogs a long time ago...

Just bring the Rams back. The Bolts can stay down south.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Bulldogs was used for a historical franchise in the same state as the Browns, the Canton Bulldogs. I think it is a good name.

Seems like a poor match for the city of Los Angeles tbh... if it ends up being the Chargers, I don't see how whitewashing a semi-local team's identity would make sense... there's already so much value in the Chargers brand, why change it to something clunky like "Bulldogs" to appease the small cross-section of fans who would "get it?"

None of the three teams would change its name.

Agreed. All of the names have been around too long to warrant a change.

Agreed. But, I think the LA Bulldogs sounds like a solid name, FWIW.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.