Jump to content

Cleveland Browns Unveil New Uniforms


jimsimo

Recommended Posts

9 minutes ago, Ice_Cap said:

Well never mind that this string of words doesn't make much sense...

 

You called people dense because you thought they were unfairly maligning your use of the word "objective."

 

In this case you were using "objective" to push a subjective opinion of a logo. 

 

So no. I didn't quote you out of ignorance or out of context. Hell, your "dense" comment wasn't even in the post of yours I quoted. So obviously I read the whole convo. 

I'm just cutting out the middle men and getting to the meat of the issue. You snapped because a lot of people liked a logo you didn't. 

 

It's fair to hold the opinion that the logo in question isn't good, but trying to claim your opinion is objective truth and getting mad when others point out how subjective you're being isn't going to win anyone over to your side of an argument. 

 

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.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, CLEstones said:

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.

Well there you go. 

It's a message board. We communicate via the written word here. People can't infer tone from what you've written unless you go out of your way to make it obvious. Which you didn't. 

 

So it's not his fault he couldn't pick up on your sarcasm. We have the :upside: for situations just like this.

 

4 minutes ago, CLEstones said:

Therefore, you 100% DID quote me out of context/ignorance.  This should sufficiently end this portion of the conversation.

If that makes you feel better? Sure. 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

19 minutes ago, colortv said:

 

What exactly would you prefer?

 

There's not much you can do if it's not going to be an elf or dog given the name Browns.

 

With a name like Browns they need something sleek and simple. It's not any less creative than say the Bears or Giants logos.

 

It fits in well:

 

2w3nyj8.jpg.05dfe5bd3fc00ee128d927049ea1

 

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.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 minutes ago, CLEstones said:

but there are also OBJECTIVE aspects of the logo that make it terrible.

And you lost the plot again. There's nothing "objectively" bad about the =B= logo. Even the rule against using a team initial in place of a locale initial is flexible and flaunted with notable exceptions. 

 

So it's your opinion that it's a bad logo. It's a fair opinion to have, but it's not an objective truth. 

 

5 minutes ago, CLEstones said:

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.

Well I'm fond of the =B= because it's a logo in the tradition of the Giants, Bears, and Packers' logos. 

This isn't the Tampa Bay Lightning pretending they're an Original Six team. This is the Cleveland Browns. A team that, at least as far as the official NFL record books go, has as just as much history as those before mentioned football teams. 

So in that sense the =B= logo (or a hypothetical =C= logo) seems like the logo the team should have had decades ago. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 minutes ago, CLEstones said:

 

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.

 

 

 

You keep mentioning "History" and "Tradition", but:

 

1. The Browns history of the last 60 odd years is that of mostly ineptitude.

 

2. How do you tie into the history of the franchise besides the dog or elf given the name "Browns"? A silhouette of the coach would be completely out of place.

 

3. All history and tradition starts somewhere, and indeed it also evolves.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

22 hours ago, CLEstones said:

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.

Honestly? Most of the Browns logos I've seen in the Concepts section don't do it for me. The only Browns logo concepts I like better than the =B= are the ones that turn it into a =C=.

 

The bulldog concepts and logos are terrible because they reduce the team to a representation of the team's most fringe fanbase. A fanbase that a few level-headed Browns fans I've spoken to have called an embarrassment. 

 

The elf elf is perfectly fine, and I'm down for him as the primary if the =B= logo (or a =C= version) can't be used. 

Problem is that he needs to be cleaned up. If only a bit. And I haven't seen a version that does a good job of that. 

 

And I doubt Paul Brown's family would be down with the team using his image, considering they own a divisional rival. 

 

So in my opinion? You're left with the =B= or the elf. The =B= would be easier to embroider on a small scale if nothing else. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Let's also be honest here, with a franchise like the Browns which has been around for however long, doesn't have a concrete identity(IE an animal or object) keeps things basic and represents a working class city, minimalism for a logo fits the image of the team.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, colortv said:

Let's also be honest here, with a franchise like the Browns which has been around for however long, doesn't have a concrete identity(IE an animal or object) keeps things basic and represents a working class city, minimalism for a logo fits the image of the team.

Yeah. Exactly. The =B= logo's strength is that it looks like something the team would have used in the 60s. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

22 minutes ago, CLEstones said:

 

 

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.

 

 

Well I can't disagree with that.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

29 minutes ago, Ice_Cap said:

So in that sense the =B= logo (or a hypothetical =C= logo) seems like the logo the team should have had decades ago. 

 

It sure as hell beats this one that they apparently almost had decades ago.

 

https://www.clevescene.com/64-and-counting/archives/2010/02/09/the-hunt-for-the-great-orange-brown-and-white-whale-unraveling-the-mystery-of-the-1965-cb-cleveland-browns-helmet-logo

 

1265742274-brownscbhelmet6.jpgimages?q=tbn:ANd9GcQfuq1O_Zcn0cZVQawytKlBrowns+CB+Helmet.jpg

 

This logo always struck me as an "Oh, damn!  Is that due tomorrow?!?!" job.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, colortv said:

Honestly if they adopted this as the logo:

 

-font-b-Cleveland-b-font-font-b-Browns-b

 

While keeping the actual helmet blank I might be able to live with that tooB)

 

Holy moly that is horrible. No, just no.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, SFGiants58 said:

 

Yikes. That really wouldn't fly. 

 

I guess go for an Elf in the style of @andrewharrington's avatar or a version of the football logo with a "C" that doesn't look like the Indians' "C."

 

To be honest, I think they could get away with having some sort of unique C logo as well as an elf, and use them in tandem, sort of how the bears use their C and bear head mark.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

21 hours ago, Ice_Cap said:

Honestly? Most of the Browns logos I've seen in the Concepts section don't do it for me. The only Browns logo concepts I like better than the =B= are the ones that turn it into a =C=.

 

The bulldog concepts and logos are terrible because they reduce the team to a representation of the team's most fringe fanbase. A fanbase that a few level-headed Browns fans I've spoken to have called an embarrassment. 

 

The elf elf is perfectly fine, and I'm down for him as the primary if the =B= logo (or a =C= version) can't be used. 

Problem is that he needs to be cleaned up. If only a bit. And I haven't seen a version that does a good job of that. 

 

And I doubt Paul Brown's family would be down with the team using his image, considering they own a divisional rival. 

 

So in my opinion? You're left with the =B= or the elf. The =B= would be easier to embroider on a small scale if nothing else. 

 

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.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • officeglenn changed the title to Cleveland Browns Unveil New Uniforms

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use.