New Browns uni coming 2015

[WinTheDay8]

What could possibly be going down the middle?

[CLEstones]

What could possibly be going down the middle?

Dog bones...

Dog bones.

Dog.

Bones.

[Blue Falcon]

just herd from a guy that works at Riddell Darker satin orange brown face mask and some clear design down the middle like the seahawks

The ensuing riot is inevitable. That sounds absolutely hideous for a team with a rich traditional background like the Browns.

You mean like not winning an NFL title since 1964?

[BucksFan5]

What could possibly be going down the middle?

Carbon fiber...Oh please no.

I cannot think of anything else to possibly put down the middle.

[Mac the Knife]

just herd from a guy that works at Riddell Darker satin orange brown face mask and some clear design down the middle like the seahawks

The ensuing riot is inevitable. That sounds absolutely hideous for a team with a rich traditional background like the Browns.

You mean like not winning an NFL title since 1964?

Or winning TEN league championships in the years prior to that, perhaps.

[swilson160]

just herd from a guy that works at Riddell Darker satin orange brown face mask and some clear design down the middle like the seahawks

The ensuing riot is inevitable. That sounds absolutely hideous for a team with a rich traditional background like the Browns.

You mean like not winning an NFL title since 1964?

Or winning TEN league championships in the years prior to that, perhaps.

I'm sure their #1 priority in designing these new uniforms is what people 55 and over (i.e. the only ones who have an actual memory of that last title) think.

[CLEstones]

What could possibly be going down the middle?

Carbon fiber...Oh please no.

I cannot think of anything else to possibly put down the middle.

Since they are pretty much getting rid of the elf... I am hoping they take the horizontal stripes from the brownie's sleeves and sublimate them down the stripe. So you will have a longitudinal stripe (very thin white-thick brown-very thin white) going from front to back, then within the longitudinal stripe, there will sublimated transverse stripes "to pay homage to the rich tradition of Cleveland Browns football and the fan favorite elf."

[BlackBolt3]

I don't think they said that the stripe that's been there is gone, just a pattern overlapped. Sort of like a detail you can only see when close up.

It's probably still dog bones though.

[TheOldRoman]

I'm sure their #1 priority in designing these new uniforms is what people 55 and over (i.e. the only ones who have an actual memory of that last title) think.

Storied history is storied history. The Browns have not been a historical doormat, no matter what people think of them not having gone to a Super Bowl. They have a strong history and were an integral part of the NFL. Saying "it didn't happen while I was alive" doesn't mean a thing. Alabama football didn't win a national championship for 17 years. By 2002, all the recruits were too young to remember that title, yet they understood that Alabama was a powerhouse. Bama got great recruiting classes even in their bumbling years. The Celtics recently went 22 years without a title, being a laughingstock for most of it. Yet they were still a storied franchise. Hell, people still hang on the Cubs' nuts despite the fact that they've gone 106 years without a championship and 69 years without a pennant.

So your point holds no water. The Browns have a proud history. Unless you want to claim that they should throw everything out the window and go Full Nike just because they haven't won a Super Bowl, which you are free to claim. But what if the Brows had won in the '80s? Would they then be justified in their current look? The 49ers created a dynasty, yet some people still celebrate the dreary cardinal-and-black crap that they went to in 1996. People who want new stuff and claim the team should switch because they haven't won recently would still want them to switch if they had won five years ago.

[chakfu]

Darker shade of orange sounds promising to me. Brown facemask sounds fine. Not sure about a texture stripe if it replaces the traditional stripe.

[tigerslionspistonshabs]

I don't think the B is necessary. A solid block C with the striping pattern is pretty solid.

I don't know. The Bengals "B" logo seems widely disliked here.

Yeah, that's because they use the team initial rather than the city initial. Plus it's in a terrible font, but I think we mostly hate it because they use a "B".

Stole the words right from my mouth.

[swilson160]

I'm sure their #1 priority in designing these new uniforms is what people 55 and over (i.e. the only ones who have an actual memory of that last title) think.

Storied history is storied history. The Browns have not been a historical doormat, no matter what people think of them not having gone to a Super Bowl. They have a strong history and were an integral part of the NFL. Saying "it didn't happen while I was alive" doesn't mean a thing. Alabama football didn't win a national championship for 17 years. By 2002, all the recruits were too young to remember that title, yet they understood that Alabama was a powerhouse. Bama got great recruiting classes even in their bumbling years. The Celtics recently went 22 years without a title, being a laughingstock for most of it. Yet they were still a storied franchise. Hell, people still hang on the Cubs' nuts despite the fact that they've gone 106 years without a championship and 69 years without a pennant.

So your point holds no water. The Browns have a proud history. Unless you want to claim that they should throw everything out the window and go Full Nike just because they haven't won a Super Bowl, which you are free to claim. But what if the Brows had won in the '80s? Would they then be justified in their current look? The 49ers created a dynasty, yet some people still celebrate the dreary cardinal-and-black crap that they went to in 1996. People who want new stuff and claim the team should switch because they haven't won recently would still want them to switch if they had won five years ago.

I'm not saying what they should or shouldn't do. But to say that a riot would inevitably ensue if they changed away from their traditional uniforms due to nostalgia for an era that no fan under 55 remembers first-hand is silly. The older fans who remember that history and treasure it aren't going to abandon the team because they changed their uniforms, and the younger fans who are the target audience for new uniforms and logos such as these don't give a damn about what the team did in 1964 or what they wore while doing it.

Also, don't forget that all Cubs fans hate themselves, and that is why they are Cubs fans.

[FFWally]

anyone else seen the @uniswag post about Browns receivers leaking the new logo? Looks a lot like Max O'Brien's Cleveland Dog.

[CLEstones]

anyone else seen the @uniswag post about Browns receivers leaking the new logo? Looks a lot like Max O'Brien's Cleveland Dog.

Did they even post what "players" that posted it? I have a hard time believing Nike and the Browns have been able to prevent all leaks but then give the new gear to a couple receivers who probably won't be on the team next year.

[PaleVermilion81]

anyone else seen the @uniswag post about Browns receivers leaking the new logo? Looks a lot like Max O'Brien's Cleveland Dog.

That IS Max's logo: http://www.ospreydawn.com/blog/2013/09/16/Cleveland/

[WinTheDay8]

anyone else seen the @uniswag post about Browns receivers leaking the new logo? Looks a lot like Max O'Brien's Cleveland Dog.

Did they even post what "players" that posted it? I have a hard time believing Nike and the Browns have been able to prevent all leaks but then give the new gear to a couple receivers who probably won't be on the team next year.

Ya here's what Wally is talking about

http://imgur.com/0ZqBbYT,aM3nJRu

http://imgur.com/0ZqBbYT,aM3nJRu#1

I have a hard time believing the Browns/NFL would officially sanction "Go Git IT" and "Gizzle"

[TheOldRoman]

Storied history is storied history. The Browns have not been a historical doormat, no matter what people think of them not having gone to a Super Bowl. They have a strong history and were an integral part of the NFL. Saying "it didn't happen while I was alive" doesn't mean a thing. Alabama football didn't win a national championship for 17 years. By 2002, all the recruits were too young to remember that title, yet they understood that Alabama was a powerhouse. Bama got great recruiting classes even in their bumbling years. The Celtics recently went 22 years without a title, being a laughingstock for most of it. Yet they were still a storied franchise. Hell, people still hang on the Cubs' nuts despite the fact that they've gone 106 years without a championship and 69 years without a pennant.

So your point holds no water. The Browns have a proud history. Unless you want to claim that they should throw everything out the window and go Full Nike just because they haven't won a Super Bowl, which you are free to claim. But what if the Brows had won in the '80s? Would they then be justified in their current look? The 49ers created a dynasty, yet some people still celebrate the dreary cardinal-and-black crap that they went to in 1996. People who want new stuff and claim the team should switch because they haven't won recently would still want them to switch if they had won five years ago.

I'm not saying what they should or shouldn't do. But to say that a riot would inevitably ensue if they changed away from their traditional uniforms due to nostalgia for an era that no fan under 55 remembers first-hand is silly. The older fans who remember that history and treasure it aren't going to abandon the team because they changed their uniforms, and the younger fans who are the target audience for new uniforms and logos such as these don't give a damn about what the team did in 1964 or what they wore while doing it.

Also, don't forget that all Cubs fans hate themselves, and that is why they are Cubs fans.

But here's where you're wrong. Yes, the Browns look is a historic look which was worn for several championships. However, that's not why a 25 year old, 35 year old or 45 year old love it. They love it because it IS the Browns. It's their team and, as a legacy NFL franchise with a strong history, it's the look they've held on to. And the fanbase is extremely passionate about their team. So yes, the fanbase is like to flip out if the design is a drastic departure from how the Cleveland Browns have looked. A handful of 16 year-olds might say the old design is boring and making them lose, but most people who have a vested interest in the team are not wanting to see a change just because the team has sucked for 20 years.

[swilson160]

Storied history is storied history. The Browns have not been a historical doormat, no matter what people think of them not having gone to a Super Bowl. They have a strong history and were an integral part of the NFL. Saying "it didn't happen while I was alive" doesn't mean a thing. Alabama football didn't win a national championship for 17 years. By 2002, all the recruits were too young to remember that title, yet they understood that Alabama was a powerhouse. Bama got great recruiting classes even in their bumbling years. The Celtics recently went 22 years without a title, being a laughingstock for most of it. Yet they were still a storied franchise. Hell, people still hang on the Cubs' nuts despite the fact that they've gone 106 years without a championship and 69 years without a pennant.

So your point holds no water. The Browns have a proud history. Unless you want to claim that they should throw everything out the window and go Full Nike just because they haven't won a Super Bowl, which you are free to claim. But what if the Brows had won in the '80s? Would they then be justified in their current look? The 49ers created a dynasty, yet some people still celebrate the dreary cardinal-and-black crap that they went to in 1996. People who want new stuff and claim the team should switch because they haven't won recently would still want them to switch if they had won five years ago.

I'm not saying what they should or shouldn't do. But to say that a riot would inevitably ensue if they changed away from their traditional uniforms due to nostalgia for an era that no fan under 55 remembers first-hand is silly. The older fans who remember that history and treasure it aren't going to abandon the team because they changed their uniforms, and the younger fans who are the target audience for new uniforms and logos such as these don't give a damn about what the team did in 1964 or what they wore while doing it.

Also, don't forget that all Cubs fans hate themselves, and that is why they are Cubs fans.

But here's where you're wrong. Yes, the Browns look is a historic look which was worn for several championships. However, that's not why a 25 year old, 35 year old or 45 year old love it. They love it because it IS the Browns. It's their team and, as a legacy NFL franchise with a strong history, it's the look they've held on to. And the fanbase is extremely passionate about their team. So yes, the fanbase is like to flip out if the design is a drastic departure from how the Cleveland Browns have looked. A handful of 16 year-olds might say the old design is boring and making them lose, but most people who have a vested interest in the team are not wanting to see a change just because the team has sucked for 20 years.

So what does that have to do with titles they won in the 50s and 60s, then?

[FFWally]

anyone else seen the @uniswag post about Browns receivers leaking the new logo? Looks a lot like Max O'Brien's Cleveland Dog.

Did they even post what "players" that posted it? I have a hard time believing Nike and the Browns have been able to prevent all leaks but then give the new gear to a couple receivers who probably won't be on the team next year.

Ya here's what Wally is talking about

http://imgur.com/0ZqBbYT,aM3nJRu

http://imgur.com/0ZqBbYT,aM3nJRu#1

I have a hard time believing the Browns/NFL would officially sanction "Go Git IT" and "Gizzle"

Thanks, I was not having luck reposting those pics.

[TheOldRoman]

So what does that have to do with titles they won in the 50s and 60s, then?

I was merely saying that the team has a strong history, and strong history stays and is respected by the people who weren't alive to witness it. That history built the franchise and the look they wear now. It boosted the look in the '80s, '90s, '00s. That history helps fans' appreciation for the current look. I am too young to remember the Bears winning a Super Bowl, but I'm not hoping for them to do a Nike rebrand just because the teams have failed for a generation. It's a look which was worn by the SB XX Bears, by Payton in the '70s, by Sayers, Butkus, Bill George. That builds equity in their current look.