Cleveland Browns

[andrewharrington]

On topic, what do people think of the return of the cursive script endzones in Cleveland?

[TBGKon]

On topic, what do people think of the return of the cursive script endzones in Cleveland?

I think it's pretty classy. It is much better than this:

and a little better than the block font:

[Gothamite]

Anybody have a pic of that?

[vls]

To get back on topic, if I were a marketing genius for the Browns I would keep the unis and helmets the same, while working on an improvement of the graphical identity of the team.

Look at college teams such as Penn State, Notre Dame, Ohio State, Boston College, Army, Navy, etc. - these teams have blank helmets, and yet some form of logo, not just a blank helmet as a logo. Notre Dame has the leprechaun, BC has the eagle, the Browns need something identifiable.

I would consider making a script "C" or interlocking script "CB" like the font used in their endzones this season. This logo could be used in such places as mid-field, TV graphics...etc.

Exactly!

Leave the unis the same and come up with a secondary logo that people can identify with.

And NO Not the Elf

I lived in Cleveland most of my life and that Thing (elf) is too HAPPY and creeps me out. It doesn't reflect the AFC North what so ever.

Now maybe San Francisco could use it...

Just kidding 49er's...

[powersurge]

Look at college teams such as Penn State, Notre Dame, Ohio State, Boston College, Army, Navy, etc. - these teams have blank helmets, and yet some form of logo, not just a blank helmet as a logo. Notre Dame has the leprechaun, BC has the eagle, the Browns need something identifiable.

I completely agree.

They should use the Brownie more. Problem solved.

I agree with both of these posts. Astrobull hit the nail on the head.

I don't see the problem with the "Dawg" logo quite honestly. Its a nice idea for a logo that represents the diehard fans of the team. I really like the idea of teams trying to identify somewhat with their fanbase, especially one as diehard as Cleveland. Not to mention the logo looks pretty good IMO.

[leedsunited]

Look at college teams such as Penn State, Notre Dame, Ohio State, Boston College, Army, Navy, etc. - these teams have blank helmets, and yet some form of logo, not just a blank helmet as a logo. Notre Dame has the leprechaun, BC has the eagle, the Browns need something identifiable.

I completely agree.

They should use the Brownie more. Problem solved.

I agree with both of these posts. Astrobull hit the nail on the head.

I don't see the problem with the "Dawg" logo quite honestly. Its a nice idea for a logo that represents the diehard fans of the team. I really like the idea of teams trying to identify somewhat with their fanbase, especially one as diehard as Cleveland. Not to mention the logo looks pretty good IMO.

I think my main beef with it, aside from the gimmicky nature of the name itself since the Dawgpound as we knew it really existed at Municipal Stadium, is the fact that it's a poorly rendered image.

[iowahoo]

My problem with the uninspired dawg logo is that it shares a semblance to a cheap ass bear logo.

[VitaminD]

Look at college teams such as Penn State, Notre Dame, Ohio State, Boston College, Army, Navy, etc. - these teams have blank helmets, and yet some form of logo, not just a blank helmet as a logo. Notre Dame has the leprechaun, BC has the eagle, the Browns need something identifiable.

I completely agree.

They should use the Brownie more. Problem solved.

I agree with both of these posts. Astrobull hit the nail on the head.

I don't see the problem with the "Dawg" logo quite honestly. Its a nice idea for a logo that represents the diehard fans of the team. I really like the idea of teams trying to identify somewhat with their fanbase, especially one as diehard as Cleveland. Not to mention the logo looks pretty good IMO.

Grrrr... I'll do the Cliff's Notes version.

1. A symbol of a subsegment of the fan base rooting for the team should not represent the team itself, as it does not even represent the totality of the fan abse supporting the team.

2. The stadium where said subsegment was named no longer exists.

3. It's a rip off of a :censored:ty beer logo.

4. It's gimmicky, and it'd be like the Packers dumping the "G" for a chunk of cheese, the Raiders for large black holes, or the Eagles scribbling "700 Level RULEZZZZ!" over their wings. Commemorate the fan base (as a whole or otherwise) elsewhere, don't put that garbage on the team's uniform.

5. Without the team, the fan base doesn't exist.

6. The Browns have a perfectly good logo (Brownie the Elf). As mentioned above, Astrobull's spot-on.

[andrewharrington]

Jesus. It's clearly not a ripoff of the Red Dog logo. It's a bulldog, so naturally it looks like a bulldog. So is the Red Dog logo; thus, it looks like a bulldog as well. Two visual translation of the same object are going to bear some resemblance to each other no matter how it's said and done. Todd Radom based his rendering on his own pet. The dude who designed the Red Dog logo sucks at designing logos. Enough said. The dawg logo is a well-rendered piece of graphic art, but it really shouldn't represent the team as it does not in fact, represent the team.

[Blue Falcon]

Just think of all the trouble the Browns could have saved us on this board had they opted for a 'real' nickname from their inception in 1946, rather than naming the team for the egomaniacal coach and then later trying to say a 'brown' is a 'dog.'

Had they done so, surely this thread would not have bulged into six pages of name-calling and outrage about the team's "lack of identity" or "identity."

And yes, I'll stop calling you Shirley.

[iowahoo]

Jesus. It's clearly not a ripoff of the Red Dog logo. It's a bulldog, so naturally it looks like a bulldog. So is the Red Dog logo; thus, it looks like a bulldog as well. Two visual translation of the same object are going to bear some resemblance to each other no matter how it's said and done. Todd Radom based his rendering on his own pet. The dude who designed the Red Dog logo sucks at designing logos. Enough said. The dawg logo is a well-rendered piece of graphic art, but it really shouldn't represent the team as it does not in fact, represent the team.

Tempest- I prefaced my statement by saying that was my problem with it. I understand it is a bulldog. But it is not a football playing bulldog, or a bulldog with a helmet on, or a full body bulldog. It is too similar, in my opinion, to the Red Dog logo. They are both just the heads of the bulldog. My point is that it is very, very similar to the Red Dog logo when they could have made it unique by adding a helmet... or a body.... To me the bulldog logo is as uninspiring or as unoriginal as if they would have gone with a paw print.

[JQK]

I'd like to see the Browns either use an updated brownie, or go with a nice collegiate-type logo, like an interlocked "CB", something like that.

Needless to say, the uniform and helmet should not be touched.

[hacim419]

I've been seeing the elf more and more the last few years, I just got a jacket with the elf last year and a T-Shirt a few days ago, at the store, not even online.

[Gothamite]

Jesus. It's clearly not a ripoff of the Red Dog logo. It's a bulldog, so naturally it looks like a bulldog. So is the Red Dog logo; thus, it looks like a bulldog as well. Two visual translation of the same object are going to bear some resemblance to each other no matter how it's said and done. Todd Radom based his rendering on his own pet. The dude who designed the Red Dog logo sucks at designing logos. Enough said. The dawg logo is a well-rendered piece of graphic art, but it really shouldn't represent the team as it does not in fact, represent the team.

Tempest- I prefaced my statement by saying that was my problem with it. I understand it is a bulldog. But it is not a football playing bulldog, or a bulldog with a helmet on, or a full body bulldog. It is too similar, in my opinion, to the Red Dog logo. They are both just the heads of the bulldog. My point is that it is very, very similar to the Red Dog logo when they could have made it unique by adding a helmet... or a body.... To me the bulldog logo is as uninspiring or as unoriginal as if they would have gone with a paw print.

That's my reaction as well.

It does bear a strong resemblance to the beer logo, although I do not believe that Radom intended it.

[Sec19Row53]

[4. It's gimmicky, and it'd be like the Packers dumping the "G" for a chunk of cheese, the Raiders for large black holes, or the Eagles scribbling "700 Level RULEZZZZ!" over their wings. Commemorate the fan base (as a whole or otherwise) elsewhere, don't put that garbage on the team's uniform.

Thank you for 3 excellent analogies. Spot on!

[VitaminD]

[4. It's gimmicky, and it'd be like the Packers dumping the "G" for a chunk of cheese, the Raiders sporting large black holes, or the Eagles scribbling "700 Level RULEZZZZ!" over their wings. Commemorate the fan base (as a whole or otherwise) elsewhere, don't put that garbage on the team's uniform.

Thank you for 3 excellent analogies. Spot on!

Any time. This irritates me like few other topics within this entire community. And it isn't that I find the Browns' uniforms so sacred that they couldn't be altered. But the insistence on plastering a graphic tangentially related to the team is just insane. Hell, let's not stop there - ditch the Broncos' horsehead logo for that guy who cavorts around in a barrel at Broncos games! He's crazy and really embodies not only the fans, but the team, the city of Denver, the state of Colorado, and the entire western half of the US!!

It's not like "Dawgs" is even an unofficial nickname for the team, either. If the Yankees used "[bronx] Bombers" as an alternate graphic, it'd look asinine - and that's a commonly used nickname for the team! The dog head has such a tenuous link with the team, yet people infatuated with it grasp at it because they either can't leave tradition well enough alone or just want to have something for the sake of having it. Like Kinger said - an interlocking "CB", an updated Brownie - just enough with the dog already!

[vls]

[4. It's gimmicky, and it'd be like the Packers dumping the "G" for a chunk of cheese, the Raiders sporting large black holes, or the Eagles scribbling "700 Level RULEZZZZ!" over their wings. Commemorate the fan base (as a whole or otherwise) elsewhere, don't put that garbage on the team's uniform.

Thank you for 3 excellent analogies. Spot on!

Any time. This irritates me like few other topics within this entire community. And it isn't that I find the Browns' uniforms so sacred that they couldn't be altered. But the insistence on plastering a graphic tangentially related to the team is just insane. Hell, let's not stop there - ditch the Broncos' horsehead logo for that guy who cavorts around in a barrel at Broncos games! He's crazy and really embodies not only the fans, but the team, the city of Denver, the state of Colorado, and the entire western half of the US!!

It's not like "Dawgs" is even an unofficial nickname for the team, either. If the Yankees used "[bronx] Bombers" as an alternate graphic, it'd look asinine - and that's a commonly used nickname for the team! The dog head has such a tenuous link with the team, yet people infatuated with it grasp at it because they either can't leave tradition well enough alone or just want to have something for the sake of having it. Like Kinger said - an interlocking "CB", an updated Brownie - just enough with the dog already!

THANK YOU!!!

The dawg belongs to the fans...not the team. It was designed specifically for us/them.

And the Elf...he's totally Gay...

[Gothamite]

And the Elf...he's totally Gay...

And you were doing so well.

Or was this another of my "you forgot the sarcasm tag, friend" moments?

[vls]

And the Elf...he's totally Gay...

And you were doing so well.

Or was this another of my "you forgot the sarcasm tag, friend" moments?

I forgot the sarcasm....but I still don't like it. Never did. When I was a kid it freaked me out.

I also don't like dolls, clowns or ventriloquist puppets.

[02Rover]

1) You...got...an...expansion...team... That was both an unprecedented move in speed and being decided. In fact, because you had to have a team so gosh darn fast, the NFL wasn't able to give Cleveland the needed start up time. In addition, you got to keep the old team's history....which has NEVER happened elsewhere in major league sports. Again...Cleveland fans got a better deal than any other fanbase has gotten before or since after losing a team. It's hypocritical, and somewhat offensive, to be mad at the NFL because you got your franchise TOO FAST.

Too fast? They were gone three years. They waited as long as they could on what to do with Cleveland because they used it as a threat to other cities that their team would leave and go to Cleveland to be the Browns. They could have decided well before they did so the new Browns would be able to put together their staff, and scout for the expansion and college drafts along with everthing else that goes into putting an organization together.

Could you provide a link on other teams threatening to move there? I know the NFL did have a couple of threatened and actual moves during that time period, but I don't think a team threatened to go to Cleveland. I thought it was pretty much a given that the new Cleveland team would be an expansion team, and then it turned into a "hurry up" franchise because Browns fans were impatient. Face it...the NFL coddled you. It is ungrateful of you to complain about the state of the franchise, when it is in a large part your doing.

That is flat out not true. The NFL promised a new team to be titled the Browns with the history in 96 when the city dropped its lawsuit against Modell and the league. Theu used the opening in Cleveland to leverage other cities into new stadiums. Modell has bragged about this. Tampa and Cincy are two cities that I know for a fact that used the opening in Cleveland to leverage their cities into giving them a new building. The official expansion announcement didnt come until early 98, with the awarding of the franchise until September 98. That was over 2 1/2 years of wasted time between the official droppign of the lawsuit and the awarding of the expansion team.

Please, dont debate this topic with Browns fans. We know how it went down. We were here, we lived it. Yes, the city demanded its team back in 3 years. If we didnt get that, we would have forced Modell into court and not a single court in this city/county/ state would have ruled in favor of Modell and the league. We/they could have forced him to stay here and play in an empty staduim with little or no advertising thsu forcing him to sell locally. The deal spared the NFL that embarassment, but the city and the fans were used and abused by the league. We are still feeling the effects of not starting off correctly.

It was a bad deal for Browns fans.