New Paul Brown Stadium field

[illwauk]

I think the "B" is a good logo for a team that plays in Boston, Baltimore, Boise, etc. But it has always seemed dumb for a team based in Cincy.

ive never understood why people think that. damn the Bears, an orange "C" would be a better solution?? those kinds of "rules" only hinder creativity and cancel any chance of executing a proper solution. if the goal is to differentiate your team from others, doing something that already has been done is not a good solution. i cant even see why the B is considered bad aesthetically. i think its very well done

Hey, the Bears yanked their C from the Reds... isn't there a cliche about turnabout and fair play?

I understand your point, but I don't like that they used a B for pretty much the same reasons as The Old Roman and I highly doubt a striped C in the same font with the same tiger-stripe design would ever been mitaken for the Bears.

[Chazberg]

I think the "B" is a good logo for a team that plays in Boston, Baltimore, Boise, etc. But it has always seemed dumb for a team based in Cincy.

ive never understood why people think that. damn the Bears, an orange "C" would be a better solution?? those kinds of "rules" only hinder creativity and cancel any chance of executing a proper solution. if the goal is to differentiate your team from others, doing something that already has been done is not a good solution. i cant even see why the B is considered bad aesthetically. i think its very well done

Hey, the Bears yanked their C from the Reds... isn't there a cliche about turnabout and fair play?

I understand your point, but I don't like that they used a B for pretty much the same reasons as The Old Roman and I highly doubt a striped C in the same font with the same tiger-stripe design would ever been mitaken for the Bears.

Wrong. The Bears took the wishbone C from the University of Chicago

[Gothamite]

I agree that the leaping tiger was better and that the Bengals should be using a C and not a B. You know what's ironic though? When Paul Brown actually owned the Bengals, he insisted that there be no markings on the playing surface at Riverfront Stadium, claiming that the people were there to see a football game, not a circus. The Bengals current playing field stands for nearly everything the man its named after was against.

Paul Brown also hated flashy uniforms on bad teams...

[BrandMooreArt]

I think the "B" is a good logo for a team that plays in Boston, Baltimore, Boise, etc. But it has always seemed dumb for a team based in Cincy.

ive never understood why people think that. damn the Bears, an orange "C" would be a better solution?? those kinds of "rules" only hinder creativity and cancel any chance of executing a proper solution. if the goal is to differentiate your team from others, doing something that already has been done is not a good solution. i cant even see why the B is considered bad aesthetically. i think its very well done

Hey, the Bears yanked their C from the Reds... isn't there a cliche about turnabout and fair play?

I understand your point, but I don't like that they used a B for pretty much the same reasons as The Old Roman and I highly doubt a striped C in the same font with the same tiger-stripe design would ever been mitaken for the Bears.

it wouldnt be mistaken for the Bears sure, but why not distance your identity from another team as much as you can? to say "this is the way things are done, all teams letters must represent the city" is really closed minded and completely inside the box. nobody else in football uses a B. (unless you count that alternate Browns logo, is it even an official mark?) they have something thats simple and professional, and well done. weather it is actually attractive is debatable, but again. i like it. ill agree though, i would prefer to see some more finesse on the endzones but its fine. it IS a circus. check the uniforms

[02Rover]

It's the Bengals we're talking about here. Being a total eyesore is kind of their thing.

Yeah totally. Have you seen thier unis? *lol* Great take, dude.

[evanmaldonado]

I'm okay with the B since it stands for Bengals. I see the team name as what the logo should be representing, not the city. I just like the tiger head logo best, but the B's not bad

[hawk36]

Never liked the B. Seemed forced and emphasizing the B instead of C seems wrong, just like they're prepping for a move to a new city. Not that they're doing that but when you distance your team from the city, it's much easier to pull up roots.

[Cujo]

It's the Bengals we're talking about here. Being a total eyesore is kind of their thing.

Yeah totally. Have you seen thier unis? *lol* Great take, dude.

Why is it ONLY PEOPLE FROM OHIO react this way when someone takes a dig at one of their teams? They take wayyy too much pride in supporting their miserable teams.

[ESTONES6]

Based on the monstrosity that is their uniform set, part of me was expecting orange turf with black yard stripes.

[RedSox44]

Preferred the leaping tiger, but I like the new endzone designs.

They're very similar, if not identical, to the old endzone designs.

I don't know, I don't follow the Bengals by any means. I just like the endzone designs.

[andrewharrington]

Never liked the B. Seemed forced and emphasizing the B instead of C seems wrong, just like they're prepping for a move to a new city. Not that they're doing that but when you distance your team from the city, it's much easier to pull up roots.

Agreed. A team (ideally) should represent its city, and its nickname should be just that, an alternate name that fans can call them. Think of it like a soccer team. Would it be okay for Liverpool to use an 'R' logo, since they are the Reds? I know it's not exactly the same thing, but using a B for the Cincinnati Bengals sounds about as ridiculous to me as it does to use an R for Liverpool FC. Like Hawk said, a city monogram has confident staying power, while a team monogram looks wishy-washy. At the end of the day, yes, it's a very closed-minded viewpoint, but design isn't just about testing the limits of creativity. Most of design is creating the best solution within a given set of parameters, and for me, one of the parameters for using a monogram logo should be that it must represent the city name, not the team name.

[JH42XCC]

Instead of a striped 'B', they should put the Bengals helmet at midfield.

[BrandMooreArt]

Never liked the B. Seemed forced and emphasizing the B instead of C seems wrong, just like they're prepping for a move to a new city. Not that they're doing that but when you distance your team from the city, it's much easier to pull up roots.

Agreed. A team (ideally) should represent its city, and its nickname should be just that, an alternate name that fans can call them. Think of it like a soccer team. Would it be okay for Liverpool to use an 'R' logo, since they are the Reds? I know it's not exactly the same thing, but using a B for the Cincinnati Bengals sounds about as ridiculous to me as it does to use an R for Liverpool FC. Like Hawk said, a city monogram has confident staying power, while a team monogram looks wishy-washy. At the end of the day, yes, it's a very closed-minded viewpoint, but design isn't just about testing the limits of creativity. Most of design is creating the best solution within a given set of parameters, and for me, one of the parameters for using a monogram logo should be that it must represent the city name, not the team name.

those parameters should include the branding aspect of it. identity design is about separating yourself from competitors, and having an instantly recognizable mark. an orange C, even with tiger stripes, is too close to the Chicago Bears for my liking. especially when the alternate solution is something more unique. i just cannot imagine myself going by predetermined "rules" while entering a project. if the best solution ended up being a generic one (orange C) then so be it, but i see no advantage and only disadvantages of going that way for the Bengals. i cant be sure, but id imagine Marc Verlander/NFL thought the same thing

[illwauk]

I think the "B" is a good logo for a team that plays in Boston, Baltimore, Boise, etc. But it has always seemed dumb for a team based in Cincy.

ive never understood why people think that. damn the Bears, an orange "C" would be a better solution?? those kinds of "rules" only hinder creativity and cancel any chance of executing a proper solution. if the goal is to differentiate your team from others, doing something that already has been done is not a good solution. i cant even see why the B is considered bad aesthetically. i think its very well done

Hey, the Bears yanked their C from the Reds... isn't there a cliche about turnabout and fair play?

I understand your point, but I don't like that they used a B for pretty much the same reasons as The Old Roman and I highly doubt a striped C in the same font with the same tiger-stripe design would ever been mitaken for the Bears.

it wouldnt be mistaken for the Bears sure, but why not distance your identity from another team as much as you can? to say "this is the way things are done, all teams letters must represent the city" is really closed minded and completely inside the box. nobody else in football uses a B. (unless you count that alternate Browns logo, is it even an official mark?) they have something thats simple and professional, and well done. weather it is actually attractive is debatable, but again. i like it. ill agree though, i would prefer to see some more finesse on the endzones but its fine. it IS a circus. check the uniforms

I'm definitely not against a team using a monogram to represent is nickname and think it actually works better that way in some instances, but here, it just feels redundant to use a B since the tiger-stripes already represent the Bengals part of the name.

Hey, the Bears yanked their C from the Reds... isn't there a cliche about turnabout and fair play?

I understand your point, but I don't like that they used a B for pretty much the same reasons as The Old Roman and I highly doubt a striped C in the same font with the same tiger-stripe design would ever been mitaken for the Bears.

Wrong. The Bears took the wishbone C from the University of Chicago

Are you sure about that? I think the wishbone C was fairly generic in the early 20th century, but had come to be associated with the Reds by the time the Bears started using it.

[ns80]

The B is in the middle of the field for Brown, as in the :censored:ty owner.

[sportsfan0518]

Does this mean the tiger logo will go extinct eventuality?

[hawk36]

Never liked the B. Seemed forced and emphasizing the B instead of C seems wrong, just like they're prepping for a move to a new city. Not that they're doing that but when you distance your team from the city, it's much easier to pull up roots.

Agreed. A team (ideally) should represent its city, and its nickname should be just that, an alternate name that fans can call them. Think of it like a soccer team. Would it be okay for Liverpool to use an 'R' logo, since they are the Reds? I know it's not exactly the same thing, but using a B for the Cincinnati Bengals sounds about as ridiculous to me as it does to use an R for Liverpool FC. Like Hawk said, a city monogram has confident staying power, while a team monogram looks wishy-washy. At the end of the day, yes, it's a very closed-minded viewpoint, but design isn't just about testing the limits of creativity. Most of design is creating the best solution within a given set of parameters, and for me, one of the parameters for using a monogram logo should be that it must represent the city name, not the team name.

Probably most common scenario of using a letter as the logo is in baseball. Of the 30 MLB teams, only 4, the White Sox, Twins, Angles, and A's use letters that stand for the mascot not city. 22 teams hats have the letter(s) of their city on them.

In the NFL, of the 32 teams, you have 3, the Bengals, Raiders, and Steelers that have logos with letters/words for their mascot but not the city. On the other hand, there are 7 with logos that use letters/words for their city.

[BrandMooreArt]

I think the "B" is a good logo for a team that plays in Boston, Baltimore, Boise, etc. But it has always seemed dumb for a team based in Cincy.

ive never understood why people think that. damn the Bears, an orange "C" would be a better solution?? those kinds of "rules" only hinder creativity and cancel any chance of executing a proper solution. if the goal is to differentiate your team from others, doing something that already has been done is not a good solution. i cant even see why the B is considered bad aesthetically. i think its very well done

Hey, the Bears yanked their C from the Reds... isn't there a cliche about turnabout and fair play?

I understand your point, but I don't like that they used a B for pretty much the same reasons as The Old Roman and I highly doubt a striped C in the same font with the same tiger-stripe design would ever been mitaken for the Bears.

it wouldnt be mistaken for the Bears sure, but why not distance your identity from another team as much as you can? to say "this is the way things are done, all teams letters must represent the city" is really closed minded and completely inside the box. nobody else in football uses a B. (unless you count that alternate Browns logo, is it even an official mark?) they have something thats simple and professional, and well done. weather it is actually attractive is debatable, but again. i like it. ill agree though, i would prefer to see some more finesse on the endzones but its fine. it IS a circus. check the uniforms

I'm definitely not against a team using a monogram to represent is nickname and think it actually works better that way in some instances, but here, it just feels redundant to use a B since the tiger-stripes already represent the Bengals part of the name.

Hey, the Bears yanked their C from the Reds... isn't there a cliche about turnabout and fair play?

I understand your point, but I don't like that they used a B for pretty much the same reasons as The Old Roman and I highly doubt a striped C in the same font with the same tiger-stripe design would ever been mitaken for the Bears.

Wrong. The Bears took the wishbone C from the University of Chicago

Are you sure about that? I think the wishbone C was fairly generic in the early 20th century, but had come to be associated with the Reds by the time the Bears started using it.

im also having trouble seeing it as redundant. i understand what you're saying, C for city, stripes for team name, but the tiger striped B just seems appropriate to me.

note: a monogram is a symbol with 2 or more letters. not 1

[tBBP]

My whole hang-up with the "B" logo is this: it works great as a supporting logo...shouldn't be classified as the primary, in my opinion. That tiger-head should be. Sure, not the greatest tiger-head logo, but it's far from the worst.

As for the Bengals' field...what they should do is leave the tiger stripe pattern in the endzones...MINUS the scripts. Those stripes are strong enough to stand on their own. If they insist on putting that monogram at mid-field, it'd fit in much better.

[nuordr]

I like the new field mainly because they are using a logo on the field instead of the helmet or that hideous Bengal.