EJ_Barlik Posted May 4, 2015 Share Posted May 4, 2015 Look - I'm no Browns fan. But look at it this way...at least they didn't go the North Carolina route and put argyle striping on the pants.But why is it so stinking hard for a team (any team) to just sit down and say: Hey - let's design a uniform top that is a single base color and the only stripes are on the extreme edge of each sleeve? What makes them want to go crazy and put incomplete (like the Colts) or goofy looking (like the browns) stripes somewhere. Or worse yet, why do they have to try to make double or triple-color shoulder offsets (like the Bucs and Titans). What is so stinking hard about saying let's make a nice-looking uniform that looks good asthetically?Simple doesn't mean stupid. Simple can be classy (Green Bay, Houston, Kansas City).Modern/updated doesn't necessarily mean whorish, but it often leans that way when poorly executed (Jags, Bucs, Vikings [weird striping on the sleeves]). But modern can also be well executed (Cardinals, Seahawks, Broncos).CFCS (Change for change's sake) isn't always a good thing (Jets, Eagles).All that being said, I tend to agree that "Browns" on the pants makes them look amatuerish. And they, of all teams, were the least XFL-like before this change. Now, it won't be "He Hate Me" on the jersey....it will just be "he hate me" on the design discussion boards.Cleveland, you're better than this. We need to revoke your right to host the Rock and Roll Hall of Fame. These jerseys don't rock the house...at all.If this were American Bandstand, I think I'd only give them a 36. But only cause they still use Brown, Orange, and White. 5-time Defending NL East Champions Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
EJ_Barlik Posted May 4, 2015 Share Posted May 4, 2015 I saw this on Twitter, it was found at WalMart lmaoThat's just wrong on so many levels...... 5-time Defending NL East Champions Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mbannon92 Posted May 4, 2015 Share Posted May 4, 2015 I saw this on Twitter, it was found at WalMart lmaoThat's just wrong on so many levels......I saw someone in Indianapolis of all places wearing one of these shirts. The player was Joe Haden IIRC. Nike + CFL 2015 | 2015-16 NBA Concepts | Complete College Football Redesign Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
vmd9 Posted May 7, 2015 Share Posted May 7, 2015 The new orange and stripes look awesome. But I just don't see a difference in the helmet finish. Big missed opportunity... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gothamite Posted May 7, 2015 Share Posted May 7, 2015 I wouldn't qualify failing to make an ill-advised change a "missed opportunity." Quite the opposite, actually. The Green Bay Packers Uniform Database! Now in a handy blog. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheOldRoman Posted May 7, 2015 Share Posted May 7, 2015 I will agree with him. With not going to matte, the Browns missed an opportunity to make the uniform even worse. It was, sadly, the only such opportunity they missed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
oldschoolvikings Posted May 8, 2015 Share Posted May 8, 2015 Look - I'm no Browns fan. But look at it this way...at least they didn't go the North Carolina route and put argyle striping on the pants.But why is it so stinking hard for a team (any team) to just sit down and say: Hey - let's design a uniform top that is a single base color and the only stripes are on the extreme edge of each sleeve? What makes them want to go crazy and put incomplete (like the Colts) or goofy looking (like the browns) stripes somewhere. Or worse yet, why do they have to try to make double or triple-color shoulder offsets (like the Bucs and Titans). What is so stinking hard about saying let's make a nice-looking uniform that looks good asthetically?Simple doesn't mean stupid. Simple can be classy (Green Bay, Houston, Kansas City).Modern/updated doesn't necessarily mean whorish, but it often leans that way when poorly executed (Jags, Bucs, Vikings [weird striping on the sleeves]). But modern can also be well executed (Cardinals, Seahawks, Broncos).CFCS (Change for change's sake) isn't always a good thing (Jets, Eagles).Aaaand you lost me. http://dstewartpaint.blogspot.com/ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BBTV Posted May 8, 2015 Share Posted May 8, 2015 Look - I'm no Browns fan. But look at it this way...at least they didn't go the North Carolina route and put argyle striping on the pants.But why is it so stinking hard for a team (any team) to just sit down and say: Hey - let's design a uniform top that is a single base color and the only stripes are on the extreme edge of each sleeve? What makes them want to go crazy and put incomplete (like the Colts) or goofy looking (like the browns) stripes somewhere. Or worse yet, why do they have to try to make double or triple-color shoulder offsets (like the Bucs and Titans). What is so stinking hard about saying let's make a nice-looking uniform that looks good asthetically?Simple doesn't mean stupid. Simple can be classy (Green Bay, Houston, Kansas City).Modern/updated doesn't necessarily mean whorish, but it often leans that way when poorly executed (Jags, Bucs, Vikings [weird striping on the sleeves]). But modern can also be well executed (Cardinals, Seahawks, Broncos).CFCS (Change for change's sake) isn't always a good thing (Jets, Eagles).All that being said, I tend to agree that "Browns" on the pants makes them look amatuerish. And they, of all teams, were the least XFL-like before this change. Now, it won't be "He Hate Me" on the jersey....it will just be "he hate me" on the design discussion boards.Cleveland, you're better than this. We need to revoke your right to host the Rock and Roll Hall of Fame. These jerseys don't rock the house...at all.If this were American Bandstand, I think I'd only give them a 36. But only cause they still use Brown, Orange, and White.Not to pile on, but this post doesn't make a whole lot of sense. For instance, what is the Jets and Eagles CFCS? How does North Carolina's argyle have anything to do with... well, anything? "The views expressed here are mine and do not reflect the official opinion of my employer or the organization through which the Internet was accessed." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
colinturner95 Posted May 8, 2015 Share Posted May 8, 2015 The new orange and stripes look awesome. But I just don't see a difference in the helmet finish. Big missed opportunity...Am I the only one that sees a carbon pattern in the stripes? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
vmd9 Posted May 8, 2015 Share Posted May 8, 2015 The carbon fiber pattern is definitely there. Not sure the reasoning though. It seems out of place.Regarding the finish of the helmet. I think matte would have looked awful. But this "satin" finish they used looks no different than before. Just way too dull. I really think a metallic or high gloss finish like Oregon State, Ok State, Virginia, could have looked a lot better. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CLEstones Posted May 8, 2015 Share Posted May 8, 2015 The new orange and stripes look awesome. But I just don't see a difference in the helmet finish. Big missed opportunity...Am I the only one that sees a carbon pattern in the stripes? No. I think the majority of people can see it. I think what vmd9 was referring to was the actual shell finish. That was one of the first rumors that surfaced was that the shell was going to have some sort of textured finish.As for the carbon fiber pattern on the stripes... its a waste. I would have rather seen horizontal stripes on the vertical stripes as a nod to the socks pattern or the hat/sleeves on the Brownie elf logo. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WavePunter Posted May 9, 2015 Share Posted May 9, 2015 An anodized orange finish like Illinois would have been the best.. Not chrome, not matte, not this unpolished cheap looking crap they're trying to pass off as satin, but a nice semi-metallic looking anodized finish that is actually a matte or satin metallic (rather than matte or satin of a plain paint finish).. If you haven't seen Illinois's metallic orange helmet, imagine an orange version of the Vikings helmet Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JayMac Posted May 9, 2015 Share Posted May 9, 2015 An anodized orange finish like Illinois would have been the best.. Not chrome, not matte, not this unpolished cheap looking crap they're trying to pass off as satin, but a nice semi-metallic looking anodized finish that is actually a matte or satin metallic (rather than matte or satin of a plain paint finish).. If you haven't seen Illinois's metallic orange helmet, imagine an orange version of the Vikings helmetThis one? I'm not a huge fan of it. Vikings purple works well for it. But the orange comes off looking like a copper-like color. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
oldschoolvikings Posted May 9, 2015 Share Posted May 9, 2015 The new orange and stripes look awesome. But I just don't see a difference in the helmet finish. Big missed opportunity...Am I the only one that sees a carbon pattern in the stripes? Yeah, you can definitely see it if the picture is fairly close up, or I guess if you're standing next to the player. Personally, I don't see the point. Originally the entire reason behind a sports uniform... bright colors, large numbers... was for the spectators to be able to tell the teams and players apart. A lot of these little details... things like this, the Seahawks' helmet pattern, etc. just seems to me to come under the heading of things they do just because they can.Does that pattern add to the overall design in any impactful way? Nope. But it's a detail the designer can throw in to impress the client that they're doing... something, I guess. http://dstewartpaint.blogspot.com/ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hugevolsfan Posted May 11, 2015 Share Posted May 11, 2015 The new orange and stripes look awesome. But I just don't see a difference in the helmet finish. Big missed opportunity...Am I the only one that sees a carbon pattern in the stripes? Yeah, you can definitely see it if the picture is fairly close up, or I guess if you're standing next to the player. Personally, I don't see the point. Originally the entire reason behind a sports uniform... bright colors, large numbers... was for the spectators to be able to tell the teams and players apart. A lot of these little details... things like this, the Seahawks' helmet pattern, etc. just seems to me to come under the heading of things they do just because they can.Does that pattern add to the overall design in any impactful way? Nope. But it's a detail the designer can throw in to impress the client that they're doing... something, I guess.Totally agree with this just doing something for the sake of doing it which to me is never a reason to do something. My Fictional Football League Version 3 My Fictional Football Leagues WebsiteMy Church Website Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Buster Posted May 12, 2015 Share Posted May 12, 2015 The new orange and stripes look awesome. But I just don't see a difference in the helmet finish. Big missed opportunity...Am I the only one that sees a carbon pattern in the stripes? Yeah, you can definitely see it if the picture is fairly close up, or I guess if you're standing next to the player. Personally, I don't see the point. Originally the entire reason behind a sports uniform... bright colors, large numbers... was for the spectators to be able to tell the teams and players apart. A lot of these little details... things like this, the Seahawks' helmet pattern, etc. just seems to me to come under the heading of things they do just because they can.Does that pattern add to the overall design in any impactful way? Nope. But it's a detail the designer can throw in to impress the client that they're doing... something, I guess.Totally agree with this just doing something for the sake of doing it which to me is never a reason to do something.I bet you'll notice the striping detail under the lights on gameday though. The stripe looks like it will pop on TV, will probably look raised. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sec19Row53 Posted May 12, 2015 Share Posted May 12, 2015 The new orange and stripes look awesome. But I just don't see a difference in the helmet finish. Big missed opportunity...Am I the only one that sees a carbon pattern in the stripes? Yeah, you can definitely see it if the picture is fairly close up, or I guess if you're standing next to the player. Personally, I don't see the point. Originally the entire reason behind a sports uniform... bright colors, large numbers... was for the spectators to be able to tell the teams and players apart. A lot of these little details... things like this, the Seahawks' helmet pattern, etc. just seems to me to come under the heading of things they do just because they can.Does that pattern add to the overall design in any impactful way? Nope. But it's a detail the designer can throw in to impress the client that they're doing... something, I guess.Totally agree with this just doing something for the sake of doing it which to me is never a reason to do something.I bet you'll notice the striping detail under the lights on gameday though. The stripe looks like it will pop on TV, will probably look raised.[tongue in cheek] Kind of like how the Seahawks' stripe pops on TV? It's where I sit. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
guest23 Posted May 13, 2015 Share Posted May 13, 2015 The 2.5 most misused terms in this board are "pop" and "(re)branding". Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Old School Fool Posted May 13, 2015 Share Posted May 13, 2015 The 2.5 most misused terms in this board are "pop" and "(re)branding".Don't forget "clip art" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sport Posted May 13, 2015 Share Posted May 13, 2015 The 2.5 most misused terms in this board are "pop" and "(re)branding".muddled. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.