New Browns uni coming 2015

[Harmening]

I don't know, define "desperately cling to"? Were the Red Sox desperately clinging to their home jerseys before 2004? What is the timeframe without championships after which teams should jettison their strong, classic looks and let Nike design something for them? The Cubs are obviously past that point, so maybe they should rebrand to navy and volt with Hydrographics designing a silver road uniform.

Not winning a World Series is a lot different than just being a complete joke of a franchise with hardly any wins and zero stability a the qb position or anywhere else for that matter.

Brian Hoyer is the only qb in franchise history with a winning record and he just got benched. Their problem isn't that they can't win a championship, it's that they can't win games. Completely different.

Maybe the Browns should just switch their logo to a revo speed helmet...

I don't know that the parallel universe exists in which the Cubs aren't a joke of a franchise. And you can say "This Cleveland Browns franchise didn't exist before 1999" until you're blue in the face, but it's not true.

The Browns have a strong, classic look which is loved by a huge portion of their strong fanbase. There is a huge amount of brand equity just from having NFL Films of Jim Brown and even the good teams in the '80s which fell short. Having a strong look that dates back 50 years is huge. I think the Bucs' creamsicles were great, but I at least understand why people would say the look was soft and a joke which symbolized horrid teams. But there's nothing comically bad or effeminate about the Browns' jerseys. The Bears and Raiders (currently) have all been awful in classic uniforms, and they didn't change them just because the teams lost. The Packers and Colts didn't change their uniforms when they went many years between Super Bowls titles (both tweaked them, but then undid the tweaks).

So, the brand has a strong connection with the fanbase, and symbolizes hard-nosed football for a team in a blue collar city. That's fine. And even that aside, they have a solid look. So people need to stop looking to Nike to provide a greater meaning to team uniforms. We don't need the Bengals to look like :censored:ing tigers. We don't need the Vikings to have numbers that mimic a Viking sail. Just make a good football uniform. The Browns have that, and they are abandoning it.

The Cubs have been in the playoffs, and the aforementioned football teams have all played in a super bowl in the past 10-15 yrs. I don't recall the Browns even having a winning season much less playoff appearances. Not saying they haven't had a winning season but if they have it doesn't seem like it and that seems to be the sentiment regarding the Browns.

With that being said I'm definitely a big fan of their current look. I associate it with losing but I do think it's a good look. I even like the brown pants.

Kelly Holcomb and the 2002 playoff Browns say hi!

That was a darn good game.

[WavePunter]

I like the orange mask concept, but white is far superior to grey.

[shaydre1019]

I don't know, define "desperately cling to"? Were the Red Sox desperately clinging to their home jerseys before 2004? What is the timeframe without championships after which teams should jettison their strong, classic looks and let Nike design something for them? The Cubs are obviously past that point, so maybe they should rebrand to navy and volt with Hydrographics designing a silver road uniform.

Not winning a World Series is a lot different than just being a complete joke of a franchise with hardly any wins and zero stability a the qb position or anywhere else for that matter.

Brian Hoyer is the only qb in franchise history with a winning record and he just got benched. Their problem isn't that they can't win a championship, it's that they can't win games. Completely different.

Maybe the Browns should just switch their logo to a revo speed helmet...

I don't know that the parallel universe exists in which the Cubs aren't a joke of a franchise. And you can say "This Cleveland Browns franchise didn't exist before 1999" until you're blue in the face, but it's not true.

The Browns have a strong, classic look which is loved by a huge portion of their strong fanbase. There is a huge amount of brand equity just from having NFL Films of Jim Brown and even the good teams in the '80s which fell short. Having a strong look that dates back 50 years is huge. I think the Bucs' creamsicles were great, but I at least understand why people would say the look was soft and a joke which symbolized horrid teams. But there's nothing comically bad or effeminate about the Browns' jerseys. The Bears and Raiders (currently) have all been awful in classic uniforms, and they didn't change them just because the teams lost. The Packers and Colts didn't change their uniforms when they went many years between Super Bowls titles (both tweaked them, but then undid the tweaks).

So, the brand has a strong connection with the fanbase, and symbolizes hard-nosed football for a team in a blue collar city. That's fine. And even that aside, they have a solid look. So people need to stop looking to Nike to provide a greater meaning to team uniforms. We don't need the Bengals to look like :censored:ing tigers. We don't need the Vikings to have numbers that mimic a Viking sail. Just make a good football uniform. The Browns have that, and they are abandoning it.

The Cubs have been in the playoffs, and the aforementioned football teams have all played in a super bowl in the past 10-15 yrs. I don't recall the Browns even having a winning season much less playoff appearances. Not saying they haven't had a winning season but if they have it doesn't seem like it and that seems to be the sentiment regarding the Browns.

With that being said I'm definitely a big fan of their current look. I associate it with losing but I do think it's a good look. I even like the brown pants.

Kelly Holcomb and the 2002 playoff Browns say hi!

See, granted in relatively young, but I have no recollection of them having any success. This proves me wrong. But my point is that I'm sure they've lost frequently enough in these uniforms to have them associated with winning.

[Gothamite]

And by the early 1990s, the Packers uniforms were associated with twenty years of sucking. To the point where the team designed new ones before changing their mind at the last minute.

Funny how quickly that can change.

[leopard88]

What, exactly, is "the strong brand" associated with the team's current look? What thoughts/feelings does that brand evoke? Is it something a fan of the team wants to continue being associated with?

To me the biggest problem is not their strong brand now it is the almost certainty that the brand Nike puts out will be considerably worse.

All the teams they touched I would rate like this so far:

1. Minnesota Vikings - Slight Upgrade, not a big fan but overall it is better than what it replaced

2. Seattle Seahawks - Push, I was never a fan of their previous set & I really like some of the aspects but way too many inconsistencies on this one

3. Miami Dolphins - Downgrade in everything they changed from the previous set

4. Tampa Bay Buccaneers - Downgrade in everything they changed from the previous set

5. Jacksonville Jaguars - Downgrade, Helmet is the worst thing I have seen in the NFL and the uniforms are slightly better than before but no where near the excellence of the 90s uniform

Looking at the stats say the Browns have about a 20% of looking better than they do now, 20% of looking the same, & 60% of looking worse or like a bunch of clowns.

The stats are not in their favor.

The odds are probably worse than that because the Browns currently have a good look. The Dolphins managed to downgrade from a muddled set and the Vikings upgraded in large part because the prior set was so bad.

[Gothamite]

Indeed.

There's little to do that can improve the Browns' uniforms, and a lot of room to downgrade.

[hugevolsfan]

Indeed.

There's little to do that can improve the Browns' uniforms, and a lot of room to downgrade.

oh I agree with both of you but I was just trying to give them a chance.

I personally have not loved any of the Nikefying of the NFL. If I was a fan of the Vikings I would be very disappointed with the new unis just because of all the nonsense associated with it like the numbers, helmet difference, & stripes but I also see how much most fans hated the past uniform which I kinda liked.

I keep trying to convince myself that does not make me a bad person.

[leopard88]

Indeed.

There's little to do that can improve the Browns' uniforms, and a lot of room to downgrade.

oh I agree with both of you but I was just trying to give them a chance.

I personally have not loved any of the Nikefying of the NFL. If I was a fan of the Vikings I would be very disappointed with the new unis just because of all the nonsense associated with it like the numbers, helmet difference, & stripes but I also see how much most fans hated the past uniform which I kinda liked.

I keep trying to convince myself that does not make me a bad person.

No, it doesn't make you a bad person.

Overall, I like most of the what the Vikings did. I can even live with the weird/gimmicky sleeve stripes. However, the ridiculous number font takes it from "pretty good" to "it's better than the mess they used to have."

All of the numbers look weird, but some combos are worse than others.

. . . and this doesn't cover where 22 and 55 (for example) use different versions of the same digit.

[nuordr]

I don't know, define "desperately cling to"? Were the Red Sox desperately clinging to their home jerseys before 2004? What is the timeframe without championships after which teams should jettison their strong, classic looks and let Nike design something for them? The Cubs are obviously past that point, so maybe they should rebrand to navy and volt with Hydrographics designing a silver road uniform.

Not winning a World Series is a lot different than just being a complete joke of a franchise with hardly any wins and zero stability a the qb position or anywhere else for that matter.

Brian Hoyer is the only qb in franchise history with a winning record and he just got benched. Their problem isn't that they can't win a championship, it's that they can't win games. Completely different.

Maybe the Browns should just switch their logo to a revo speed helmet...

I don't know that the parallel universe exists in which the Cubs aren't a joke of a franchise. And you can say "This Cleveland Browns franchise didn't exist before 1999" until you're blue in the face, but it's not true.

The Browns have a strong, classic look which is loved by a huge portion of their strong fanbase. There is a huge amount of brand equity just from having NFL Films of Jim Brown and even the good teams in the '80s which fell short. Having a strong look that dates back 50 years is huge. I think the Bucs' creamsicles were great, but I at least understand why people would say the look was soft and a joke which symbolized horrid teams. But there's nothing comically bad or effeminate about the Browns' jerseys. The Bears and Raiders (currently) have all been awful in classic uniforms, and they didn't change them just because the teams lost. The Packers and Colts didn't change their uniforms when they went many years between Super Bowls titles (both tweaked them, but then undid the tweaks).

So, the brand has a strong connection with the fanbase, and symbolizes hard-nosed football for a team in a blue collar city. That's fine. And even that aside, they have a solid look. So people need to stop looking to Nike to provide a greater meaning to team uniforms. We don't need the Bengals to look like :censored:ing tigers. We don't need the Vikings to have numbers that mimic a Viking sail. Just make a good football uniform. The Browns have that, and they are abandoning it.

The Cubs have been in the playoffs, and the aforementioned football teams have all played in a super bowl in the past 10-15 yrs. I don't recall the Browns even having a winning season much less playoff appearances. Not saying they haven't had a winning season but if they have it doesn't seem like it and that seems to be the sentiment regarding the Browns.

With that being said I'm definitely a big fan of their current look. I associate it with losing but I do think it's a good look. I even like the brown pants.

Here is the some history for you:

1985 1985 NFL AFC Central 1st 8 8 0 Lost Divisional Playoffs (Dolphins 21–24) Kevin Mack (ROY)

1986 1986 NFL AFC Central 1st 12 4 0 Won Divisional Playoffs (Jets 23–20)

Lost Conference Championship^[12] (Broncos 20–23) Marty Schottenheimer (COY)

1987^[13]1987 NFL AFC Central 1st 10 5 0 Won Divisional Playoffs (Colts 38–21)

Lost Conference Championship^[14] (Broncos 33–38)

1988 1988 NFL AFC Central 2nd^[15] 10 6 0 Lost Wild Card Playoffs (Oilers 23–24)

1989 1989 NFL AFC Central 1st 9 6 1 Won Divisional Playoffs (Bills 34–30)

Lost Conference Championship^[16] (Broncos 21–37) Michael Dean Perry (Def. POY

These were the 2nd best uniforms associated with the teams during this time span:

Now here are their best looking uniforms IMO (from the Brian Sipe era)

[BrianLion]

And by the early 1990s, the Packers uniforms were associated with twenty years of sucking. To the point where the team designed new ones before changing their mind at the last minute.

Funny how quickly that can change.

On the flip side, the Patriots jettisoned their classic look of 30 some odd years (mostly associated with losing) in the 90's, and adopted an updated look that is now forever tied to their turn around as a franchise.

[TheOldRoman]

And by the early 1990s, the Packers uniforms were associated with twenty years of sucking. To the point where the team designed new ones before changing their mind at the last minute.

Funny how quickly that can change.

On the flip side, the Patriots jettisoned their classic look of 30 some odd years (mostly associated with losing) in the 90's, and adopted an updated look that is now forever tied to their turn around as a franchise.

And I think that was a bad decision. All they needed to do was clean up Pat or even get a new logo. Even "The British wore red!" aside, that set was great. But the current set will likely never be replaced completely because of the three titles and six conference titles (with the logo, at least). And of course, you could put the Patriots in red, green or burlap over the last 15 years, they'd still have the same record.

Also in the equation, you have the Buccaneers, who replaced a great look synonymous with losing, won a Super Bowl in a modern classic, and then decided to destroy it for no reason and piss off people who liked the new championship set and people who liked the creamsickles.

If Warren Sapp, Simeon Rice, Derrick Brooks and John Lynch won a Super Bowl in orange, nobody would consider that set "soft," at least until the team was terrible again. If Tom Brady won three Super Bowls in red, nobody would yell that that every time they look at the Patriots' unis they see the Bears eviscerating them in the Super Bowl.

[Pabig]

And by the early 1990s, the Packers uniforms were associated with twenty years of sucking. To the point where the team designed new ones before changing their mind at the last minute.

Funny how quickly that can change.

How were the new ones supposed to look?

[Chawls]

Something like this:

[OnWis97]

And by the early 1990s, the Packers uniforms were associated with twenty years of sucking. To the point where the team designed new ones before changing their mind at the last minute.

Funny how quickly that can change.

On the flip side, the Patriots jettisoned their classic look of 30 some odd years (mostly associated with losing) in the 90's, and adopted an updated look that is now forever tied to their turn around as a franchise.

And I think that was a bad decision. All they needed to do was clean up Pat or even get a new logo. Even "The British wore red!" aside, that set was great. But the current set will likely never be replaced completely because of the three titles and six conference titles (with the logo, at least). And of course, you could put the Patriots in red, green or burlap over the last 15 years, they'd still have the same record.

Also in the equation, you have the Buccaneers, who replaced a great look synonymous with losing, won a Super Bowl in a modern classic, and then decided to destroy it for no reason and piss off people who liked the new championship set and people who liked the creamsickles.

If Warren Sapp, Simeon Rice, Derrick Brooks and John Lynch won a Super Bowl in orange, nobody would consider that set "soft," at least until the team was terrible again. If Tom Brady won three Super Bowls in red, nobody would yell that that every time they look at the Patriots' unis they see the Bears eviscerating them in the Super Bowl.

I'd add that the Pats are not as important to NFL lore as the Browns. The Browns (officially) have been around forever and their look helps remind us of that. Yeah, they've been bad for a long time too but that will change regardless of uniforms.

I agree that it's too bad New England changed. No R/W/B teams have red as the primary ahead of blue now. That was a great uniform with the except of Pat the Patriot being too detailed to look good on a helmet. The red jersey with the UCLA stripes was beautiful. All that said, though, I'd argue that the Pats were much more "touchable" than the Browns.

Regarding the Packers near change, the 49ers almost implemented a new helmet right in the middle (or latter end I suppose) of their time as the league's most relevant team. In both cases, cooler heads (and fan backlash?) prevailed.

[guest23]

And by the early 1990s, the Packers uniforms were associated with twenty years of sucking. To the point where the team designed new ones before changing their mind at the last minute.

Funny how quickly that can change.

On the flip side, the Patriots jettisoned their classic look of 30 some odd years (mostly associated with losing) in the 90's, and adopted an updated look that is now forever tied to their turn around as a franchise.

And I think that was a bad decision. All they needed to do was clean up Pat or even get a new logo. Even "The British wore red!" aside, that set was great. But the current set will likely never be replaced completely because of the three titles and six conference titles (with the logo, at least). And of course, you could put the Patriots in red, green or burlap over the last 15 years, they'd still have the same record.

Also in the equation, you have the Buccaneers, who replaced a great look synonymous with losing, won a Super Bowl in a modern classic, and then decided to destroy it for no reason and piss off people who liked the new championship set and people who liked the creamsickles.

If Warren Sapp, Simeon Rice, Derrick Brooks and John Lynch won a Super Bowl in orange, nobody would consider that set "soft," at least until the team was terrible again. If Tom Brady won three Super Bowls in red, nobody would yell that that every time they look at the Patriots' unis they see the Bears eviscerating them in the Super Bowl.

I'd add that the Pats are not as important to NFL lore as the Browns. The Browns (officially) have been around forever and their look helps remind us of that. Yeah, they've been bad for a long time too but that will change regardless of uniforms.

I agree that it's too bad New England changed. No R/W/B teams have red as the primary ahead of blue now. That was a great uniform with the except of Pat the Patriot being too detailed to look good on a helmet. The red jersey with the UCLA stripes was beautiful. All that said, though, I'd argue that the Pats were much more "touchable" than the Browns.

Regarding the Packers near change, the 49ers almost implemented a new helmet right in the middle (or latter end I suppose) of their time as the league's most relevant team. In both cases, cooler heads (and fan backlash?) prevailed.

Like it or not the pats have risen from being an irrelevant nfl franchise to being one of the marquee properties while the browns have languished in mediocrity since the late 80's. The last two decades of pats success + the influence of the northeast sports media will ensure that they will have at least another decade of relevance if they ever hit hard times. Unfortunately the browns aren't afforded that benefit and it only seems that their fans would consider them a heritage franchise at this point.

[Gothamite]

I'm not sure that's actually relevant to what he posted.

The Browns are largely in the position now that the Patriots were in the late 1980s/early 90s. If the Patriots had kept their old uniforms, those old uniforms would stand for winning today.

[Xist2inspire]

The Patriots having red as their primary was an extremely poor decision. Regardless of how the actual combo looked, you've gotta pay more attention to detail than that.

The Browns need to keep it simple, end of story. The absolute limit that they can go "modern" is OSU's alts, and even those have elements that are too "out there." You always want to keep tradition in mind when redesigning a team, because from there you can find out the things you have to keep, things that are vital to the team's identity. Tradition is the Browns' identity, more so than probably any other team in the NFL. They're a blue-collar, no-frills, no flash, keep it simple team. Even the Steelers put more of an emphasis on "style" than the Browns. For the Browns, it really doesn't matter if they're winning or losing, what matters is that they are who they are, and that they continue to be. That's the main reason why they're still here today, there's something about that identity that resonates with the city of Cleveland. Nike should keep that all that in mind if they want to successfully redesign the Browns.

[Mac the Knife]

Here is the some history for you:

1985 1985 NFL AFC Central 1st 8 8 0 Lost Divisional Playoffs (Dolphins 21–24) Kevin Mack (ROY)

1986 1986 NFL AFC Central 1st 12 4 0 Won Divisional Playoffs (Jets 23–20)

Lost Conference Championship^[12] (Broncos 20–23) Marty Schottenheimer (COY)

1987^[13]1987 NFL AFC Central 1st 10 5 0 Won Divisional Playoffs (Colts 38–21)

Lost Conference Championship^[14] (Broncos 33–38)

1988 1988 NFL AFC Central 2nd^[15] 10 6 0 Lost Wild Card Playoffs (Oilers 23–24)

1989 1989 NFL AFC Central 1st 9 6 1 Won Divisional Playoffs (Bills 34–30)

Lost Conference Championship^[16] (Broncos 21–37) Michael Dean Perry (Def. POY

Screw that history. Let's look at the REAL history...

1946 - AAFC Champions, with league's best regular season record.

1947 - AAFC Champions, with league's best regular season record.

1948 - AAFC Champions, with league's best regular season record, and Pro Football's first-ever undefeated season.

1949 - AAFC Champions, with league's best regular season record.

1950 - Club joins NFL as a merger of equals between the AAFC and NFL, though only a few AAFC teams join.

1950 - AAFC Champion Browns demolish NFL Champion Philadelphia Eagles in season opener, 35-10, then go on to win 5th straight league title (first in NFL).

1951 - NFL Eastern Conference Champions, appearing in championship game.

1952 - NFL Eastern Conference Champions, appearing in championship game.

1953 - NFL Eastern Conference Champions, appearing in championship game.

1954 - NFL Eastern Conference Champions, appearing in and winning championship game, and 6th pro title.

1955 - NFL Eastern Conference Champions, appearing in and winning championship game, and 7th pro title.

1957 - NFL Eastern Conference Champions, appearing in championship game.

During their first 11 years, the Tampa Bay Buccaneers were lucky if they found their jock straps. The Browns meanwhile dominated a league which on the field was every measure equal or better to the NFL, then for good measure went over to the NFL and dominated there as well, appearing in TEN STRAIGHT championships between them, and winning seven.

That's a history you hold onto.

[BrianLion]

I'm not sure that's actually relevant to what he posted.

The Browns are largely in the position now that the Patriots were in the late 1980s/early 90s. If the Patriots had kept their old uniforms, those old uniforms would stand for winning today.

or maybe they'd never have won anything if they didnt make the switch! Maybe the red jerseys irritate the refs in the 2002 Divisional Playoff and he decides that Brady actually fumbled and gave the ball the to the Raiders. Everything after that comes crashing down around the Pats. Right now Brady is working for the Big 10 Network and Belicheck is running a car wash outside of Houston.

It's like the Butterfly Effect.

WE'LL NEVER KNOW!!!!

[BrianLion]

Like it or not the pats have risen from being an irrelevant nfl franchise to being one of the marquee properties while the browns have languished in mediocrity since the late 80's. The last two decades of pats success + the influence of the northeast sports media will ensure that they will have at least another decade of relevance if they ever hit hard times. Unfortunately the browns aren't afforded that benefit and it only seems that their fans would consider them a heritage franchise at this point.

Not to mention this version of the Browns is a zombie of that former historic NFL franchise. They're like the Ottawa Senators; running around in someone else's clothes hanging on to someone else's history (and doing nothing with it for 15 years now).