jimsimo

Report: Browns New Unis Taking a Traditional Turn

Recommended Posts

14 minutes ago, schlim said:

What if the Browns just put 'Paul' down the stripe of their left leg, and 'Jim' down the right leg, with Browns on the chest, everybody would be happy then, right?

No. . . . just no.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, MJWalker45 said:

I'm a Browns fan and I don't think Paul Brown's initials should be on a Cleveland uniform. He was an important part of the team, but he was not the owner. It would be like putting Jim Brown's initials on permanently once he passes on. It shouldn't happen for either man. 

I don't think it should happen, I think stuff like that is corny. The point was is that it isn't out of the realm of possibility.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, -Akronite- said:

 

If TTUN did a blackout it would make very little sense and probably look bad, but IDK if it would shift my feelings on the Buckeyes in black.

Why is it that it would make little sense for that school up north to do a blackout but it is ok for you guys? I'm glad you went there, because I truly don't understand why it's ok for Ohio Stste to go blackout.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, Sec19Row53 said:

Why is it that it would make little sense for that school up north to do a blackout but it is ok for you guys? I'm glad you went there, because I truly don't understand why it's ok for Ohio Stste to go blackout.

Black works with scarlet and grey. It looks horrible mixed with navy blue.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 2/12/2020 at 7:20 PM, colortv said:

 

1195dd4ca13b85e9b24ea60f485e657a.jpg

 

That's seriously lacking if it's a proposal for a logo.  It's not particularly well rendered, and it's just a football player.  It's like the White Sox logo that was just a baseball player, or the Cavs logo that was just a net.  There's nothing about this that means 'Browns', or 'Cleveland', other than the orange face.  Might as well just go with a plain football, since they're already brown.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
42 minutes ago, BringBackTheVet said:

That's seriously lacking if it's a proposal for a logo.  It's not particularly well rendered, and it's just a football player.  It's like the White Sox logo that was just a baseball player, or the Cavs logo that was just a net.  There's nothing about this that means 'Browns', or 'Cleveland', other than the orange face.  Might as well just go with a plain football, since they're already brown.

As a secondary logo that's used on scorebugs and smaller media, it's a good look. Maybe slap the Browns wordmark on the helmet bumper to add more to the identity but it looks like a Browns logo even without that. It's got the helmet stripes as well as the brown facemask so it's not completely soulless in that respect. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, BringBackTheVet said:

 

That's seriously lacking if it's a proposal for a logo.  It's not particularly well rendered, and it's just a football player.  It's like the White Sox logo that was just a baseball player, or the Cavs logo that was just a net.  There's nothing about this that means 'Browns', or 'Cleveland', other than the orange face.  Might as well just go with a plain football, since they're already brown.

 

 

This is a little harsh, IMO. While the illustration is simple and geometric (triangle, squares, and circles), that doesn’t mean it’s poorly done. Also, it does incorporate the single, most important aspect of the Browns (the helmet); contrasted with the White Sox batter that was a generic baseball icon that could have stood in for any team.

 

It’s not my favorite idea for a Browns logo, but I am drawn to it more than some of the “CB” ideas or a dog. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, MJWalker45 said:

Black works with scarlet and grey. It looks horrible mixed with navy blue.

But black is neither scarlet nor grey, and a blackout contains no scarlet, grey, maize or blue.

 

So why does it matter what the school colors are if you aren't using school colors in any form?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, Sec19Row53 said:

But black is neither scarlet nor grey, and a blackout contains no scarlet, grey, maize or blue.

 

So why does it matter what the school colors are if you aren't using school colors in any form?

Black is actually a school color for Ohio State, it's not for Michigan. Other Ohio State teams have used black for years as part of a uniform base as well. 

Image result for ohio state hockey

Image result for ohio state hockey

Image result for ohio state hockey

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, MJWalker45 said:

Black is actually a school color for Ohio State, it's not for Michigan. A blackout does not mean only black is used, it just means black is the primary part of that uniform set. 

Meh - when referring to school colors, it's scarlet and grey, not scarlet grey and black.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 hours ago, schlim said:

What if the Browns just put 'Paul' down the stripe of their left leg, and 'Jim' down the right leg, with Browns on the chest, everybody would be happy then, right?

To much brown. Just stick to stripes on those pants.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 hours ago, schlim said:

What if the Browns just put 'Paul' down the stripe of their left leg, and 'Jim' down the right leg, with Browns on the chest, everybody would be happy then, right?

Jim Brown has a very problematic history with women. Hardest of hard passes, and that’s before we get into the design element. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, oldschoolvikings said:

Wait, you some of you assuming the suggestion to put Paul and Jim on the legs was serious?

No, but just in case you still need to snuff out crazy talk like that.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
31 minutes ago, MJWalker45 said:

No, but just in case you still need to snuff out crazy talk like that.

And the idea of referencing Jim Brown on the uniforms has come up before, and also needs to be extinguished quickly.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
25 minutes ago, BJ Sands said:

And the idea of referencing Jim Brown on the uniforms has come up before, and also needs to be extinguished quickly.

When he dies, I'm sure the team will wear a memorial patch or helmet decal. Outside of that, they shouldn't add anything permanent, regardless if he had personal issues off the field or not. He's probably the best player to wear the uniform, but still only a player. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Sec19Row53 said:

But black is neither scarlet nor grey, and a blackout contains no scarlet, grey, maize or blue.

 

So why does it matter what the school colors are if you aren't using school colors in any form?

 

4 hours ago, Sec19Row53 said:

Meh - when referring to school colors, it's scarlet and grey, not scarlet grey and black.

 

Black not only goes with scarlet and gray, but it's a tertiary team color that is common on uniforms, in logos, and on merchandising. Doing a blackout uniform makes sense when black is part of your identity, though I understand the traditionalist concerns.

 

Michigan is another traditional school with a classic look, but black is not part of their identity and doesn't work with navy. The contrast of the maize and blue already does what a black jersey would be trying to do anyway. As a big Buckeyes fan and OSU alum, it's still not hard to admit that Michigan has an iconic look and doesn't need to mess around with alternates much (though I personally really like the bumblebee jerseys).

 

 

 

Also, agree with the sentiment that the team should not make any permanent uniform additions to honor Paul Brown, Jim Brown, or anyone else. Honor them by wearing their uniform.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, oldschoolvikings said:

Wait, are some of you assuming the suggestion to put Paul and Jim on the legs was serious?

It’s crazy idea like this that Nike takes seriously and not “go back to the previous set”. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, GFB said:

This is a little harsh, IMO. While the illustration is simple and geometric (triangle, squares, and circles), that doesn’t mean it’s poorly done. Also, it does incorporate the single, most important aspect of the Browns (the helmet); contrasted with the White Sox batter that was a generic baseball icon that could have stood in for any team.

 

It’s not my favorite idea for a Browns logo, but I am drawn to it more than some of the “CB” ideas or a dog. 

 

Allow me to elaborate, since my critique was admittedly 'lazy'.  I think the strokes are too thick, the shading or shadowing on the right side looks off, the triangle nose makes it impossible for my brain to think of it as a human, and I'm not a fan of how the mouth was done.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

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.