daveindc

New Browns uni coming 2015

Recommended Posts

You know, the more I sit on this, the more I just find the changes entirely pointless. I still stand by what I said earlier that it's an okay uniform, not a bad one. But as a whole, I just don't feel it achieved anything. I feel like changes should have a vision to them, something you're shooting for or a problem to be solved. I don't see anything but "we changed just to say we changed." No solved problem, no vision met. Just something rolled out only to say they kept up with the times, I guess.

I don't think it's a Seahawks/Bucs/Jaguars disaster by any means, but it's not a Vikings-esque winner, either. If we're going "spectrum" with this, I think it lies somewhere in Dolphins territory, basically a "it's okay I guess, but what was the point? Why'd you bother?" set.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Why all the anger over the stitching?

Its only noticeable if you look closely, otherwise it just adds something to an otherwise very simple design.

The CLEVELAND wordmark, I was totally against, until I saw it on the Uniform, and while a little NCAA, its not horrible either.

The BROWNS stripe... meh. I'd prefer a traditional one, but they are trying to attract new fans, and the kids today (under 35) grew up on the Oregonization of Football.

My 17 year old LOVES the entire look. Stripes, wordmarks, and even the leg BROWNS. My guess is if you are under 35, you will love it, if you are over, you'll feel this is the death of tradition.

If that's what it takes to get new fans, let LA have the team. Cleveland is done. It was built on a blue collar, expletive-the-future mentality that doesn't exist anymore.

Might as well rename the city. Cleveland is done.

Jesus. Please tell me I was not half as bad as this guy when I first got here... (BBTV, infred: what say you?)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

When the Browns left the fans fought for their uniforms, color, and name to return. They actually succeeded in getting it back, amazingly. BUT 15 YEARS OF DOG$HIT FOOTBALL AND THAT'S ANCIENT HISTORY.

Also, from twitter:

These things are a :censored:ing Fubu jersey

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

When the Browns left the fans fought for their uniforms, color, and name to return. They actually succeeded in getting it back, amazingly. BUT 15 YEARS OF DOG$HIT FOOTBALL AND THAT'S ANCIENT HISTORY.

Also, from twitter:

These things are a :censored:ing Fubu jersey

Was hoping no one would find that post on Instagram.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Why all the anger over the stitching?

Its only noticeable if you look closely, otherwise it just adds something to an otherwise very simple design.

The CLEVELAND wordmark, I was totally against, until I saw it on the Uniform, and while a little NCAA, its not horrible either.

The BROWNS stripe... meh. I'd prefer a traditional one, but they are trying to attract new fans, and the kids today (under 35) grew up on the Oregonization of Football.

My 17 year old LOVES the entire look. Stripes, wordmarks, and even the leg BROWNS. My guess is if you are under 35, you will love it, if you are over, you'll feel this is the death of tradition.

Don't group people in age categories! You will be mercilessly ridiculed and insulted! (I said the same thing yesterday.)

Yeah point taken.

Then again I'm 48 and love the Seahawks new look. I could do without their monochrome home Blue, but as for the uniform itself, I like it. I can see where some hate it, but then again, I'd put the Cowboys in the Blue and White Alts they wore until the NFL's asinine one helmet rule came about.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
No, it's satin. A gloss helmet would've had much more of a refection in it from the stage lighting at the unveiling.

No, it's not. That's gloss. A dull-ish gloss finish? Maybe, but not Vikings-esque satin.

brownshelmet2_zpsdozxmxoe.png

brownshelmet1_zpsixm4q2vn.png

Fubu and the XFL. "Innovation" means going back to the early 2000s.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The BROWNS on the pants is fine, and to be honest, an idea that would have looked more in place in the 80s or so.

I think CLEVELAND and BROWNS together are overkill, but the pant element isn't so bad.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I have a real feeling that the pants are going to look pretty weird on the field especially with O-lineman who wear big knee braces. That will most likely stretch out the letters something awful. I grade them :censored: +.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

When the Browns left the fans fought for their uniforms, color, and name to return. They actually succeeded in getting it back, amazingly. BUT 15 YEARS OF DOG$HIT FOOTBALL AND THAT'S ANCIENT HISTORY.

Also, from twitter:

These things are a :censored:ing Fubu jersey

See the problem is that management is an (NCAA) Tennessee fan and like all Tennessee fans, insists on living in the glory days of the late 90s and early 2000s. That's also why orange is so big in the new look.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Congrats Jags. Your helmet still ranks #1 on the stupid list. Followed closely by the Bucs number font and rounding out the top three the new Browns pants.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Also, and I don't know why this isn't a bigger deal, THIS IS THE EXACT SAME F****** THING THAT HAPPENED TO THIS FRANCHISE IN 1984. They made the same mistake AGAIN!

Look at this

ozzie_newsome_1984_09_09.jpg

That's the 1984 version of what they just released. Aside from brown numbers and some minor striping differences, it's basically the same thing. It's astounding to me. And if anything, the uniform that was too crazy for the Browns in 1984, is far far better than what they're pushing today.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

My guess is if you are under 35, you will love it, if you are over, you'll feel this is the death of tradition.

I'm 27 and I feel as if this the death of tradition.

Try again.

I'm 30 and totally agree. Do the Packers need to have Packers down both sides of their pants? Do the Cowboys need contrasting stitching to stand out? Do the Colts need a huge wordmark to let us know who they are? No they don't cause they are classic respectable teams while the Browns are a mess.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Also, and I don't know why this isn't a bigger deal, THIS IS THE EXACT SAME F****** THING THAT HAPPENED TO THIS FRANCHISE IN 1984. They made the same mistake AGAIN!

Look at this

ozzie_newsome_1984_09_09.jpg

That's the 1984 version of what they just released. Aside from brown numbers and some minor striping differences, it's basically the same thing. It's astounding to me. And if anything, the uniform that was too crazy for the Browns in 1984, is far far better than what they're pushing today.

You see kids, this is what happens when you don't pay attention to history.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
No, it's satin. A gloss helmet would've had much more of a refection in it from the stage lighting at the unveiling.

No, it's not. That's gloss. A dull-ish gloss finish? Maybe, but not Vikings-esque satin.

brownshelmet2_zpsdozxmxoe.png

brownshelmet1_zpsixm4q2vn.png

That's exactly what a satin finish is—a dullish gloss. It still has some sheen and shine to it, but not the reflectiveness of a gloss finish.

Why do you insist on arguing for the sake of arguing? It's not a true gloss finish and they called it satin. So I'm going to say it's satin until the Browns and Nike tell me differently.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Why all the anger over the stitching?

Its only noticeable if you look closely, otherwise it just adds something to an otherwise very simple design.

The CLEVELAND wordmark, I was totally against, until I saw it on the Uniform, and while a little NCAA, its not horrible either.

The BROWNS stripe... meh. I'd prefer a traditional one, but they are trying to attract new fans, and the kids today (under 35) grew up on the Oregonization of Football.

My 17 year old LOVES the entire look. Stripes, wordmarks, and even the leg BROWNS. My guess is if you are under 35, you will love it, if you are over, you'll feel this is the death of tradition.

Don't group people in age categories! You will be mercilessly ridiculed and insulted! (I said the same thing yesterday.)

Try really hard to get over it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

As an 18 year old Browns fan I like them. The pants drag it down but they will grow on me. I wish the helmet would've looked more Ohio state ish but I like it anyway. Take away the contrast stitching and it's extremely good imo. The contrast stitching is kinda like the gradient of the jags and the numbers of the bucs. If it wasn't there things would be better.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

CLEstones - the stripe abruptly stopping with only 1 angled is the same on the pants..

Mbannon92 - that's a gloss finish, or "impregnated" shell color (it's just an orange plastic shell polished up, no paint) other finishes require paint or some other medium to gain certain textures, etc, including satin.. Satin, when referencing helmet finish, is sort of metallic, but without the glitter flake, like a vintage brass or brushed aluminum.. Basically the medium between gloss and metallic flake, but these helmets, in terms of helmet finish, are plain ol' gloss

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The BROWNS on the pants is college trash. I'm pretty disappointed in that. Otherwise they're whatever. Orange numbers on brown/white is unfortunate, but not world ending. The BROWNS thing is pretty awful, though.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Just so you guys know, Matt Wilhelm (one of the broadcasters) played in the NFL. It's still hilarious hearing him talk about football uniforms though.

Wasn't he a punter or a kicker? (haven't done a search yet)

He was a linebacker for the Steelers.

Wilhelm played for the chargers the most. The Ohio State
He also played on the 2010 Green Bay Packers Super Bowl team and went to Elyria Catholic High School,my Alma Mater.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
No, it's satin. A gloss helmet would've had much more of a refection in it from the stage lighting at the unveiling.

No, it's not. That's gloss. A dull-ish gloss finish? Maybe, but not Vikings-esque satin.

brownshelmet2_zpsdozxmxoe.png

brownshelmet1_zpsixm4q2vn.png

That's exactly what a satin finish is—a dullish gloss. It still has some sheen and shine to it, but not the reflectiveness of a gloss finish.

When you say "satin finish" I think of a sort of dullish texture to the finish. Very fine. It's apparent on the Vikings' helmet. Not so on this one.

Why do you insist on arguing for the sake of arguing? It's not a true gloss finish and they called it satin. So I'm going to say it's satin until the Browns and Nike tell me differently.

Oh man, where to begin...

You would have been fine just saying "hey, I see it as satin." That's just down to personal perception. Instead you opted for "I believe everything the company that redefined Newspeak tells me."

And arguing for the sake of arguing? Good G-d. It's a message board. It's here for us to post our opinions. If yoou put your opinion out there anyone else is free to comment on it. If you can't handle a disagreement over a helmet finish then maybe the internet isn't for you.

The thing is I didn't come into this discussion looking to start something with you. You came at me guns blazing. Learn to deal with whatever problem you have with me in a manner more mature then whining about why I disagree with you over a football uniform.

Share this post


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