OconRecon Posted April 22, 2009 Report Share Posted April 22, 2009 ...Ocon, but I HATE the dawg symbol. If there's anything that should be let go, it's the dawg symbol... Yep, I'm not a huge fan of the dawg, and I've always like the Penn State approach, but I can't think of anything that is traditional, yet cool. I'd vote dog over elf (who had to be the Slider of his day) or anything else I've ever seen. I'd probably vote it over nothing. A plain number isn't bad on the helmet. You know when they do those throw back uni's? I've always thought they ought to have fast-forward uni's. Wild stuff that's way out there. Some would hate it, others love it, but it would be fun. It would also be a great way to test the waters before you release something that was created behind closed doors. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Steeler SChick Posted April 22, 2009 Report Share Posted April 22, 2009 That gay elf would be perfect. Yinz have my vote on that one. Regards .... an'at . Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
medicineman Posted April 22, 2009 Report Share Posted April 22, 2009 I didnt know we wanted your vote. Wait! I didnt even know we voted. Oh Wait....... We didnt vote you jerk off Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gips Posted April 22, 2009 Report Share Posted April 22, 2009 I happen to like the browns uniforms just the way they are but i would love them to bring back the orange pants of the 70s! lol A uniform change isnt what changes the mojo a smart football savvy owner and right regime that puts all the pieces together are what changes a loser to a winner...ford is a far worse owner than lerner could ever be he has been a loser for so long its not even funny... When the browns finally get to the superbowl it would be nice if they were in the same uniform we have known for years maybe the orange pants would come in if we ever get to the playoffs again but no more brown pants please! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nickers Posted April 22, 2009 Report Share Posted April 22, 2009 I nominate this gay thread of the year...next? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HowieDawg Posted April 22, 2009 Report Share Posted April 22, 2009 I like your idea of having a symbol to represent the franchise but not on the uni's, Ocon, but I HATE the dawg symbol. If there's anything that should be let go, it's the dawg symbol. I know, I know, the dawg is classic, right? Well, it's not. It's from the '80s. Dixon and Minniefield made it up. So it's not exactly ancient. And if anything, use of the dawg symbol legitimizes the idea that we can and should mess with the classic Browns look. What I'd like to see is the Browns choose a classic looking typeface and stick to it and then use a "CB" or "B" logo based on that font and make that our "symbol". There have been a few of those floating around but none have stuck. I want a good, solid logo that says "BROWNS FOOTBALL" and no gimmicks like that damn dawg. Seriously, why? What difference is a capital B going to make? Keeping the uniform the way it is isn't about denying we want a future but it is a nod to the past and a resolute symol of the steadfastness of the fanbase that has stuck with this team trough thick and thin, or should I say thin and thinner. Yes we need new heroes, yes we need new attitude, yes we need better results but the last thing we should see as a factor in getting it is clothing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Legacy Fan Posted April 22, 2009 Report Share Posted April 22, 2009 Right on, H! See? The Briton gets it! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ClevelandFanForLife Posted April 22, 2009 Report Share Posted April 22, 2009 That gay elf would be perfect. Yinz have my vote on that one. Regards .... an'at . wow it takes an extreme amount of stupidity to call someone else's mascot gay when your's is stealy mcbeam, the sisth member of the village people. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LCDawgFan13 Posted April 22, 2009 Report Share Posted April 22, 2009 Incorrect. Cleveland won the lawsuit. The expansion team is in Baltimore. The Browns are in Cleveland with a 3 year gap in their history. Mike Tomlin is wrong too. The NFL also disagrees with you. : http://www.profootballhof.com/history/team...?franchise_id=8 (Pasted below for your convenience) Some people just can't grasp "old school" or "spartan". Perhaps the colors should be changed to brown and orange instead of orange and brown. I like the elf but the dude needs pads. The Cleveland Browns were born in 1944 when Cleveland businessman Arthur B. McBride acquired a franchise in the new All-America Football Conference that would begin play in 1946. McBride's first act after acquiring the team was to hire Paul Brown, who had been a very successful high school, college and service coach, as coach and general manager. The teams of the AAFC basically were of comparable quality to those of the NFL but, in the first 10 years of post-World War II pro football, the Cleveland Browns proved to be the best in either league. With such all-time greats as quarterback Otto Graham, fullback Marion Motley and tackle-kicker Lou Groza leading the way, Cleveland won all four AAFC championships and amassed a 52-4-3 winning record. When the AAFC folded after the 1949 season, many insisted a major reason was the Browns' dominance that eliminated any viable competition. The AAFC-NFL settlement called for the Browns, San Francisco 49ers and Baltimore Colts to join the NFL. Many NFL diehards, still not convinced the Browns were for real, expected Cleveland to fail badly when they played against the established NFL teams. But the Browns quickly proved their domination was no fluke by opening the 1950 season with a stunning 35-10 victory over the defending NFL champion Philadelphia Eagles. Cleveland then won the NFL Eastern Conference championship for six straight years from 1950 to 1955 and NFL titles in 1950, 1954 and 1955. Jim BrownThe Browns won another divisional title in 1957, a year that saw the great running back from Syracuse, Jim Brown, join the team. In his nine-season career, Jim Brown rushed for 12,312 yards, a lifetime record that stood for more than 20 years. The Paul Brown era ended after the 1962 season and he was replaced by a former assistant, Blanton Collier. Collier gave the Browns their last NFL championship in 1964, when they defeated the Baltimore Colts, 27-0. The Browns reached the post-season playoffs 22 times in their first 40 years in the NFL. In addition to their four NFL championships between 1950 and 1964, they won 11 NFL American/Eastern Conference championships, three NFL Century Division titles and AFC Central Division championships in 1971, 1980, 1985, 1986, 1987 and 1989. In 1961, Arthur B. Modell purchased the Browns for a then-unheard-of price of $4 million. From the start, he was recognized as one of the NFL's more progressive leaders. But Modell stunned the pro football world in 1995 when he announced that he would transfer his Cleveland franchise to Baltimore to begin play in 1996. Determined to keep the team in Cleveland, Browns fans and Cleveland city officials orchestrated an unprecedented grass-roots campaign to block the move. The NFL quickly responded and, working with city officials, developed a unique solution that not only provided for a new state-of-the-art stadium, but guaranteed the return of pro football to Cleveland by no later than 1999. Additionally, Art Modell agreed to relinquish the "Browns" name, colors and team history to the new owner of the suspended franchise. I won't argue with you about how it looks on paper. But the fact remains that the team that was born in Cleveland since 1944 is the team that was moved to Baltimore. Baltimore got the ready-made team...not the brand-new build-it from scratch expansion team. Just because we got to keep our name and history books, does not mean that we kept our team! We, in Cleveland, had to start over! I understand the desire to hold onto the fond memories and traditions of the past. But the more we look to the past, the less focused on the present and future we are. There is nothing wrong with small changes/adjustments to the logo and/or the uniforms just to keep it updated. Nobody wants any drastic changes. Just something to liven it up and bring this teams looks into present day! You can definitely do that without betraying the teams history! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HowieDawg Posted April 22, 2009 Report Share Posted April 22, 2009 Baltimore did not get the team, it got the personnel. I just don't see what is wrong with the way we look today. there has always been tinkering with the uniforms over the years but it has remained a classic. It aint broke so why fix it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheClevelandSound Posted April 22, 2009 Report Share Posted April 22, 2009 Ok how about this helmet for the Browns? SEE ATTATCHED FILE. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest AdaM Posted April 22, 2009 Report Share Posted April 22, 2009 Ok how about this helmet for the Browns? SEE ATTATCHED FILE. Terrible. No way in hell should we give up the logo-less helmet. If anything just make the stripes more sporty looking. Maybe orange shoes. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ClevelandFanForLife Posted April 22, 2009 Report Share Posted April 22, 2009 Terrible. No way in hell should we give up the logo-less helmet. If anything just make the stripes more sporty looking. Maybe orange shoes. can't we just butt that picture of amber's ass on the helmets? it would distract the other team's... except for the steelers. if we put justin timberlake's ass on their it would distract them. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheClevelandSound Posted April 22, 2009 Report Share Posted April 22, 2009 Lol it was a joke. I really dont want anythign on the helmet either. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HowieDawg Posted April 22, 2009 Report Share Posted April 22, 2009 Maybe orange shoes. WTF! Adam you big girl, I hope this was a joke! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Legacy Fan Posted April 22, 2009 Report Share Posted April 22, 2009 Baltimore did not get the team, it got the personnel. Agreed. The Rats were the recipient of the largest one-sided trade in the history of the NFL. When a player gets traded, they are no longer a member of the team that they were traded from. That's essentially what happened, 53 times. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LCDawgFan13 Posted April 22, 2009 Report Share Posted April 22, 2009 Baltimore did not get the team, it got the personnel. I just don't see what is wrong with the way we look today. there has always been tinkering with the uniforms over the years but it has remained a classic. It aint broke so why fix it. They got everything about the team except the history...So, as I said, they got their own ready-made team, and proceeded to win a SuperBowl. And Cleveland got the amazing experience of starting over completely! Sorry, I thought for a second that Cleveland got the shitty end of that deal! But apparently, keeping our name and history while starting over is better than having our team yanked from us and then tweaked a little to win a Super Bowl...the one thing it never did here. You are unreal! Yep, we kept our team! Baltimore got the expansion team! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest AdaM Posted April 22, 2009 Report Share Posted April 22, 2009 WTF! Adam you big girl, I hope this was a joke! Orange helmets, gloves, shoes. Do it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HowieDawg Posted April 22, 2009 Report Share Posted April 22, 2009 I'm definately not unreal. This argument has mutated somewhat from its origins. I am not arguing about the shittiness of the Modell saga. I am not arguing that the ravens got the people. I am not arguing that we had to rebuild from the ground up. All I am saying is, that the team is the BROWNS. They could only ever live in Cleveland. Losing sucks and we need to get better but changing the clothing won't do it. I am not sitting here in rose tinted specs masturbating over a picture of Jim Brown hating the world for our lack of success. I'm just saying we don't need no stinking logo to become a winning team. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LCDawgFan13 Posted April 22, 2009 Report Share Posted April 22, 2009 I'm definately not unreal. This argument has mutated somewhat from its origins. I am not arguing about the shittiness of the Modell saga. I am not arguing that the ravens got the people. I am not arguing that we had to rebuild from the ground up. All I am saying is, that the team is the BROWNS. They could only ever live in Cleveland. Losing sucks and we need to get better but changing the clothing won't do it. I am not sitting here in rose tinted specs masturbating over a picture of Jim Brown hating the world for our lack of success. I'm just saying we don't need no stinking logo to become a winning team. I do agree with you on that. But no one has said that we need a logo to become a winning team! I personally will still love my Browns regardless of what their uniforms/helmets look like and regardless of how long it takes, if ever, for them to win a Super Bowl! But, I do think that this team, while still being the Browns and still honoring Browns tradition, could do something a little different with their uni's and logo to stay with and represent the modern era of the Cleveland Brown's and their fans! At some point in time, like it or not, someone is going to change the Browns uniforms to make them more current. I would rather see that happen now, with a little class/keeping with some tradition, than to have it happen several years from now, when it could end up being a drastic change that any of us that still remember the old Browns will absolutely hate! Just a little change in the striping...maybe some type of small logo involved, not necessarily on the helmets. Just something to make them stand out a little from the old Browns, while still paying homage to those times as well. Again, regardless, I am a Cleveland Browns fan til the day I day or the team, heaven forbid, goes away for good! And no uniform change is going to result in more wins. Just maybe a little new attitude/moral! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Steeler SChick Posted April 23, 2009 Report Share Posted April 23, 2009 I am not sitting here in rose tinted specs masturbating over a picture of Jim Brown hating the world for our lack of success. I'm just saying we don't need no stinking logo to become a winning team. Exactly. Yinz need an exorcist and a whole lot of candles and chicken bones. Regards .... an'at . Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ndneighbor Posted April 23, 2009 Report Share Posted April 23, 2009 Who else remembers Webster Slaughter painting his shoes orange? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zombo Posted April 23, 2009 Report Share Posted April 23, 2009 Who else remembers Webster Slaughter painting his shoes orange? I rememberber him streaking down the sideline in his orange shoes as we beat the vaunted Ditka Bears on MNF. I also remember his quote in his second season when asked about the "Three Rivers Curse" ... "What curse? I've never lost there." Those Browns of the late 80's didn't care what happened before them, they created their own image: the dawgpound, orange shoes, MartyBall ... winning their division every year. Ahh, those were the days. I'm hoping Mangini's bunch is ready to strike their own identity ... the city is their's for the taking. Especially after the Cavs warm-up act of bitchslapping the Lakers in the Finals (whoops, I'm getting ahead of myself...) Zombo Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.