NFL Rebranding Survey for my School Research Project

[Apereg11]

5 minutes ago, calfoxwc said:

1. "perennial losers"

Coming a ratbird fan, this is smack, and deserves to be treated as such.

***************************************************************************

2. "recently rebranded"

"Often, this involves radical changes to a brand's logo, name, legal names, image, marketing strategy, and advertising themes. Such changes typically aim to reposition the brand/company, occasionally to distance itself from negative connotations of the previous branding, or to move the brand upmarket; they may also communicate a new message a new board of directors wishes to communicate."

  We KEPT our logo, we KEPT our name, we KEPT our history. and marketing and advertising isn't all that different across the NFL I don't think. Don't misuse words, that is what I think. It helps dramatically in communication with other people.

***************************************************************************

So, you're a senior, cool. You aren't a child then. Don't use the "child" victim card.

When you graduate, here's my advice, btw, don't go to Ft. Lauderdale - we decided to go take a two week trip to central Ontario, to the end of the highway, to the end of a 6 mile jeep trail, and camped for two weeks on the other side of a remote wilderness lake. You can talk about it in your later years, and be very proud you didn't get in trouble partying in Florida.

 

See, this is the real criticism I can actually take. Thank you for not insulting me just because I'm not a Browns fan, and I'll make sure to go nowhere near Fort Lauderdale. 

[Apereg11]

14 minutes ago, TexasAg1969 said:

Just look at this as a bunch of old men yelling, "Hey kid, get off my damn lawn!"😂

Smile and keep working hard in school.😁

Also shout out to this guy

[Unsympathetic]

As many people have stated -- If every 3-5 years are a rebranding then the term "rebranding" has no actual meaning.. because that word has to be fundamentally more substantial than the changes that are in fact a part of day-to-day [or year-to-year] operations.  Browns hiring different GM/coach/QB's have really just been operations.

Haslam took far too long to accept that him doing day-to-day ops is not a good thing.. and because the team was his playtoy, he was "given" the "organizational opportunity" to learn it in-house rather than what would happen if he was in any position other than owner.... he'd get the boot.

[Wait, what? Rich people aren't any smarter than the rest of us? Yep. That's exactly what I'm saying. If anything, $ leads to a loss of self-awareness]

 

What's an actual "rebrand" ? Vegas is a good one.  Browns to Baltimore and restarting record books is one.  Chargers moving back to LA [yes, they spent one year in LA many yrs ago before moving to SD] and getting no fans in seats is a great example of a failing rebrand that's still good for the owner [the TV contract].  All the other examples you stated would.... really be operations.

If it's all about marketing [which reports to operations] then.. the discussion seems entirely different and pure fluff/fact-doesn't-matter land.  1-3yr draft priorities is just the GM doing [or not doing, hi Texans and Jaguars] their job.  Jags didn't "rebrand" under Caldwell because the problem was Caldwell not the players on the team and so if anything I'd say the rebranding would be when they hire a new full-time GM.. But as the thread has discussed the hiring/firing of GM's isn't really a rebranding either..

[Gunz41]

2 hours ago, Apereg11 said:

I'll be a man here and admit I was wrong. I shouldn't have included the 80's playoff loses in my original explanation. I understand that the rebooted Browns of '99 are a completely different organization than the one that moved to Baltimore in '96. I also want all of you to know that I'm not including the background of each team in my synthesis paper, so your beloved Browns reputation won't be tarnished.

I should have also mentioned that with my definition of a rebrand, I view the 2014 Browns as also having rebranded. The 2018 point that I clarified in my survey was an attempt for the Browns (yet again in my eyes) to reverse their reputation because they knew they had a lot of young talent and a new reputable coaching staff. 

In regard to the Jags, their recent rebrand was the opposite of what I view the Browns rebrand to be. The Jags are going from a defensive minded Super Bowl contender to a rebuilding team who's only real identity is looking forward to the future where as the Browns are going from an unsuccessful team (in the 21st century) to one that looks to be a contender for years to come with loaded young talent.

I think you missed the entire point, and I am trying to help you.

Now 1st, I'll give you the benefit of doubt that you are who you say you are. And as such, you shouldn't be spoken to like a few have. Of course I do have a different view of kids that aren't mine as I have coached a long time. But, it also does seem a bit strange that you happen to do this on a week that the Browns and Ravens play. So that is why you are getting some push back from others.

Now on to what you have said, you will certainly get some negative feedback for saying it is a completely different organization than the one that moved to Baltimore. That is just completely inaccurate. Everything STAYED in Cleveland aside from the current individuals in the organization. 

I used Jacksonville for a specific reason. They couldn't be considered a rebranding (as you described) because their 1 good year was an outlier. 

And I have no idea how you can use what you said in this post as evidence. In 2018 (if you are using Bakers 1st year) they did not have a new coaching staff. If you are meaning after the 2018 season when there was hope that Browns had turned a corner, they certainly didn't have a reputable staff, as they had 2 head coaches last year, and NEITHER are on the staff.

Now I am certainly not in your class or your teacher, but your idea/definition of a rebrand is so off that I don't think that anyone will be able to follow including your teacher the way you are describing it. But let's use a few different things instead of football to show how this is coming off to an outsider. Lets use Basketball 1st. So in your description of a rebrand, the Golden State Warriors have went through 3 rebrand in the last 10 years. Pre Durant, With Durant, Post Durant. Or lets use a company, say Mountain Dew, when they add/remove a new flavor or change a top executive is that rebranding? 

[The Gipper]

4 hours ago, Apereg11 said:

One last time I just ask as a fellow human if any of you would be willing to help me out and fill out my survey (5-10 more responses would be ideal). This whole thing wasn't meant to be an attack on the Browns in any way. I know it's not often that a Ravens fan appears on a Browns fan page, so I know obliterating me with facts must have been tempting and enjoyable. This is a lot to ask for, but if there's any way that the few people who filled out the survey can share it with close friends or family, that would be greatly appreciated. Thank you all again and I wish you all the best of luck on Monday night against Baltimore, it's gonna be a good one. 

You are being obtuse young man.  (look it up).   I provided you with facts simply to educate you to the facts that I assume you likely were never aware of.   That is one thing.

Your survey is another.   I object to that because I believe you are wholly off base with your premise that the Browns have been "rebranded" in any manner.    A slight change in uniform design is by no means a rebranding.   And as I explained, just getting new personnel, like a QB or WR or even a coach....is just business as usual for NFL teams.   Your premise MAY work with a number  of the other teams that I delineated, but not for this team.

I suggest simply that you remove the Browns from your study...as it is inapplicable to them.   If the teams you listed in your link are the ones you are to study, as I said before....replace the Browns with the Raiders.....who certainly have been Rebranded  from the Oakland Raiders to the Las Vegas Raiders.   Far more applicable. 

[Apereg11]

28 minutes ago, Gunz41 said:

I think you missed the entire point, and I am trying to help you.

Now 1st, I'll give you the benefit of doubt that you are who you say you are. And as such, you shouldn't be spoken to like a few have. Of course I do have a different view of kids that aren't mine as I have coached a long time. But, it also does seem a bit strange that you happen to do this on a week that the Browns and Ravens play. So that is why you are getting some push back from others.

Now on to what you have said, you will certainly get some negative feedback for saying it is a completely different organization than the one that moved to Baltimore. That is just completely inaccurate. Everything STAYED in Cleveland aside from the current individuals in the organization. 

I used Jacksonville for a specific reason. They couldn't be considered a rebranding (as you described) because their 1 good year was an outlier. 

And I have no idea how you can use what you said in this post as evidence. In 2018 (if you are using Bakers 1st year) they did not have a new coaching staff. If you are meaning after the 2018 season when there was hope that Browns had turned a corner, they certainly didn't have a reputable staff, as they had 2 head coaches last year, and NEITHER are on the staff.

Now I am certainly not in your class or your teacher, but your idea/definition of a rebrand is so off that I don't think that anyone will be able to follow including your teacher the way you are describing it. But let's use a few different things instead of football to show how this is coming off to an outsider. Lets use Basketball 1st. So in your description of a rebrand, the Golden State Warriors have went through 3 rebrand in the last 10 years. Pre Durant, With Durant, Post Durant. Or lets use a company, say Mountain Dew, when they add/remove a new flavor or change a top executive is that rebranding? 

Thank you again for the constructive criticism, and trust me I wouldn't lie about being a high schooler because of all things that puts a larger target on my back. As I mentioned in my first response in this thread, my definition of a rebrand is more of a mentality change surrounding the organization. I didn't pull this definition out of my ass. I have been researching marketing in sports for the past three months and the identity of a team is what people tend to consider most when choosing their fandom. In my survey it mentions only the hiring of Stefanski as part of the rebrand, not the Freddie Kitchens disaster. With my definition of a rebrand, the Warriors wouldn't be considered a rebranded team over the past ten years because their identity as being a title contender hasn't changed (besides last year, but that was because of uncontrollable injuries). Mountain Dew adding a new flavor would also not be considered a rebrand with my definition because the company has the same identity in the public's eyes. 

[The Gipper]

3 hours ago, Apereg11 said:

I'll be a man here and admit I was wrong. I shouldn't have included the 80's playoff loses in my original explanation. I understand that the rebooted Browns of '99 are a completely different organization than the one that moved to Baltimore in '96.

Well, here you are DEAD ASS wrong too.  The current Browns franchise is the same franchise that has existed...here, in Cleveland Ohio, since 1946.

See, you keep putting your foot in your mouth with your false assumptions....all based on wrong data.  

 

I also want all of you to know that I'm not including the background of each team in my synthesis paper, so your beloved Browns reputation won't be tarnished.

Well....as evidenced by the above, I am NOT trusting of what you may put in that "background", since you have made so many egregious errors. You really need to consult us on the things you may want to include in that so that you don't again, go off half cocked and appear wholly unprepared with your study.  So far, you are getting a D- grade, and I assume you will want to do better.  

I should have also mentioned that with my definition of a rebrand, I view the 2014 Browns as also having rebranded. The 2018 point that I clarified in my survey was an attempt for the Browns (yet again in my eyes) to reverse their reputation because they knew they had a lot of young talent and a new reputable coaching staff. 

OK NOW, just fucking STOP!.  YOUR views have no place in what I gather is supposed to be an attempt at a scientific study.  YOUR views are wrong under any circumstance.  Base your study on FACTS....and not ASSumptions, which you have done to date. 

In regard to the Jags, their recent rebrand was the opposite of what I view the Browns rebrand to be. The Jags are going from a defensive minded Super Bowl contender to a rebuilding team who's only real identity is looking forward to the future where as the Browns are going from an unsuccessful team (in the 21st century) to one that looks to be a contender for years to come with loaded young talent.

This may be true....but like I said, it is NOT a matter of "rebranding".  Methinks you are just stuck on that word,  stuck on your preconceptions. That is NOT rebranding...it is just typical NFL business.

I mean....by what you are saying, any minor change of fortunes can be considered "rebranding".    The Dallas Cowboys were supposed to be Super Bowl contenders before the season began....but they suck this year and are in line for a top 5 draft pick.  Did they undergo a "rebranding' in the course of a single season just because they are losing more games than it was thought they would?   The same for the 49ers....in the Super Bowl last year, in the toilet bowl this year.     Did the  5-11  2000 New England Patriots all of a sudden do a rebranding early in the 2001 season...in which they won the Super Bowl?  No.  They just put in a guy that would become one of the greatest QBs of all time.   Did the 1998  4-12 St. Louis Rams "rebrand" in  1999...where they won the Super Bowl?  No.

 

[The Gipper]

1 hour ago, Apereg11 said:

Can you name a time where I was childish and insulting? I was the one who has been man enough to admit I was wrong about the Browns' history and ask for forgiveness. Also I'm a senior taking all college classes, and this is technically part of my homework. 

I don't know about others,  but I have been trying to give you constructive criticism.  Your mistake was in identifying where you are from and what team you root for.....you would have been better off not mentioning that.  You see...part of that history that you likely were not aware of is the animas the Browns fans have for  Baltimore, its political Pirates, and their idiot fans who seemed to have forgotten their own history.**  I didn't care about that.  You could be from SheBip Iowa for all I care.  I am just trying to get you to do more research, learn more about the teams you are trying to highlight.....direct you to actually choose the right teams for your study,  and point out where you made so many false assumptions. 

** You see, what we here think of Baltimore is that it was a city that could not keep its own team...the Colts,  a city that could not convince the NFL that it was worthy of receiving one of the 1995 expansion teams the went to Jacksonville and Carolina instead, and a city that could not succeed in getting a team without offering a massive bribe to our inept and insolvent owner to come there.    We all remember how they excused Modell for attempting to do the same thing that  they were completely up in arms when Irsay pulled the Colts from Baltimore.

So here, again, instead of the Browns....you would be better off asking Baltimore fans who had a major rebranding...by having one franchise leave, and having another created for them to appease their avarice. 

[The Gipper]

1 hour ago, Apereg11 said:

See, this is the real criticism I can actually take. Thank you for not insulting me just because I'm not a Browns fan, and I'll make sure to go nowhere near Fort Lauderdale. 

No, Cal gave you some bad advice, for a couple of reasons.    See, when we were young, Ft. Lauderdale was THE place to go for Spring break.   A group of us went there...and we RULED  Ft. Lauderdale and had a great time.*   But since then, the spring break party has moved to other locations.   So feel free to go to those....when  the Covid problem has been resolved.  I thought that is what he is going to say.  But, by all means, at some point you may also want to do what he suggests:  go off to Canada or some other northern Climate and camp, hike, canoe,  fish, fuck, (if you have the right companion)  etc. etc.  

**  Fort Lauderdale,  1974. 

 

 

[The Gipper]

1 hour ago, Unsympathetic said:

As many people have stated -- If every 3-5 years are a rebranding then the term "rebranding" has no actual meaning.. because that word has to be fundamentally more substantial than the changes that are in fact a part of day-to-day [or year-to-year] operations.  Browns hiring different GM/coach/QB's have really just been operations.

Haslam took far too long to accept that him doing day-to-day ops is not a good thing.. and because the team was his playtoy, he was "given" the "organizational opportunity" to learn it in-house rather than what would happen if he was in any position other than owner.... he'd get the boot.

[Wait, what? Rich people aren't any smarter than the rest of us? Yep. That's exactly what I'm saying. If anything, $ leads to a loss of self-awareness]

 

What's an actual "rebrand" ? Vegas is a good one.  Browns to Baltimore and restarting record books is one. 

OK...Browns NEVER moved to Baltimore....and there was no "restart" ...just a continuation

But otherwise you are pretty spot on with this post. 

Chargers moving back to LA [yes, they spent one year in LA many yrs ago before moving to SD] and getting no fans in seats is a great example of a failing rebrand that's still good for the owner [the TV contract].  All the other examples you stated would.... really be operations.

If it's all about marketing [which reports to operations] then.. the discussion seems entirely different and pure fluff/fact-doesn't-matter land.  1-3yr draft priorities is just the GM doing [or not doing, hi Texans and Jaguars] their job.  Jags didn't "rebrand" under Caldwell because the problem was Caldwell not the players on the team and so if anything I'd say the rebranding would be when they hire a new full-time GM.. But as the thread has discussed the hiring/firing of GM's isn't really a rebranding either..

 

[The Gipper]

 I have been researching marketing in sports for the past three months and the identity of a team is what people tend to consider most when choosing their fandom

Well, here is another thing I have a MAJOR issue with.....and which you may need to learn:   I am of the opinion that TRUE fans do NOT "Choose" their fandom.....they are more often born into it, either by proximity to the areas they grow up in....like myself being from NE Ohio;  or they have some familial influence....like a Dad or something that was a fan of a team who got his kid to be one also.

To talk about "choosing fandom"  speaks to us   of FRAK  behavior.   That may be a term you are unfamiliar with.  FRAK is an acronym for  FrontRunnerAssKisser.   These are people who choose to be a fan of a team because that team is winning.   A FRAK is about the most despicable of character flaws.  It means, essentially, that you are a whore for winning,   but as soon as things go wrong, they jump ship to a different team that wins a lot.  We have to deal with a lot of fucking Steeler FRAK fans around here. 

So, Hell no, I don't believe in "choosing" your fandom.   It comes to you naturally. 

You are from Maryland, and I believe you said the Ravens are your team.  That seems a natural circumstance;  and can I assume that if the Ravens have losing seasons for the next 10-12 years that you would still support them? If not, consider your self a deplorable FRAK.....if you were to jump your fandom to another team. ** see below

As you can see from the passion shown here,  most Browns fans are certainly NOT FRAKs.   A true test of a fan base is how loyal they remain in the midst of a long losing run.   And by that measure, you should be aware that the Browns fans may be considered the best fans in the entire NFL.

** But, also, do not confuse FRAKs with "Fair-weathered fans".   These are fans that still always root for the same team,  but their passions become tepid with a lot of losing...but they do come back out of the woodwork when their team starts winning. 

[Gunz41]

4 hours ago, Apereg11 said:

Thank you again for the constructive criticism, and trust me I wouldn't lie about being a high schooler because of all things that puts a larger target on my back. As I mentioned in my first response in this thread, my definition of a rebrand is more of a mentality change surrounding the organization. I didn't pull this definition out of my ass. I have been researching marketing in sports for the past three months and the identity of a team is what people tend to consider most when choosing their fandom. In my survey it mentions only the hiring of Stefanski as part of the rebrand, not the Freddie Kitchens disaster. With my definition of a rebrand, the Warriors wouldn't be considered a rebranded team over the past ten years because their identity as being a title contender hasn't changed (besides last year, but that was because of uncontrollable injuries). Mountain Dew adding a new flavor would also not be considered a rebrand with my definition because the company has the same identity in the public's eyes. 

But you see young man, you are still not understanding the point that I am trying to help you with. Others are pointing out the same thing, and Gipper is actually being very nice to you.

So I will try to explain it clearer.

1. I didn't come up with the dates 2014 and 2018, you stated them. And you are using them as rebranding. But the Browns were simply bad until a little life in 2018 and then looking pretty good this year. So nothing changed in those 2 years you stated.

Furthermore, in this very post I am replying to you mentioned Stefanski. Well he didn't arrive until 2020, so he had ZERO to do with 2018 and how you are trying to equate that.

2. You are trying to equate a new "mindset" etc as your rebranding, getting younger. That is why I brought up Warriors and Mountain Dew. The Warriors for sure would equate to what you have said ON HERE about rebranding as their was a major change. 

3. The Jaguars point must have went over your head. You even said you would look at them the opposite. So they would still be considered rebranded. 2016: 3-13, 2017: 10-6 AFC championship game, 2018: 5-11. They certainly didn't go through 3 rebranding in 3 years, what they had in 2017 would be considered an OUTLIER. And while I don't think it to be the case, without further data to substantiate it, you can't equate the Browns to not being an outlier this year.

4. Like Gipper said, most people aren't using something tangible to pick their team. It usually comes from a physical location or some kind of tie in. There are also those that may continue to follow/like a player and thus his team from college. 

As a high school senior you are 17-18, so say Born 2003. So say when you were aware, 2008. So just be honest and answer this question, what is the reason YOU are a Ravens fan? Because your family is? Because you live in Maryland? Because you liked Ray Lewis? I'll guess its one of those reasons.

Yet you are basing your project on some other theory and making the case that for fans of other teams that they CHOSE that. And you use the Browns (for some reason) who have been one of the worst franchises in your lifetime and think that. 

Again, if you can define rebranding as what you want then that is fine, more power to you. But you can't have that definition for one data point and not adhere to the same for another example.

So in closing, and maybe this can help you with your project:

What is the REASONING behind you declaring in YOUR terms the Browns had a rebranding in 2014 and again in 2018? What were the specific circumstances that brought you to that conclusion?

[Apereg11]

Yeah I'm just gonna stop responding to this thread because at this point it's a huge waste of time. I've had ZERO issues with the others team I'm investigating (I've posted my survey on fan forums for all the teams I'm looking at). This could just be because I'm a Ravens fan, or it could be because you all are just stubborn old men who won't take 30 seconds out of their day to help someone out (like seriously you won't die by filling out a survey that you deem to not be 100% accurate).  I've stated my reasons for the Browns 2018-2020 "rebrand" numerous times, so if any of you want to take the time to read the whole thread, be my guest. I'm not even going to give any of you the satisfaction of saying you "broke me down" or "defeated me" because you honestly didn't. I've never really had any negative views towards the Dawg Pound, but this whole discussion has really showed the true colors of the Browns faithful. I guess one positive that come out of this is that you guys truly do represent your team because just like a "dawg" once you bite, you don't ever let go. Good bye to you all.

[DieHardBrownsFan]

13 minutes ago, Apereg11 said:

Yeah I'm just gonna stop responding to this thread because at this point it's a huge waste of time. I've had ZERO issues with the others team I'm investigating (I've posted my survey on fan forums for all the teams I'm looking at). This could just be because I'm a Ravens fan, or it could be because you all are just stubborn old men who won't take 30 seconds out of their day to help someone out (like seriously you won't die by filling out a survey that you deem to not be 100% accurate).  I've stated my reasons for the Browns 2018-2020 "rebrand" numerous times, so if any of you want to take the time to read the whole thread, be my guest. I'm not even going to give any of you the satisfaction of saying you "broke me down" or "defeated me" because you honestly didn't. I've never really had any negative views towards the Dawg Pound, but this whole discussion has really showed the true colors of the Browns faithful. I guess one positive that come out of this is that you guys truly do represent your team because just like a "dawg" once you bite, you don't ever let go. Good bye to you all.

Don't let the door hit you in the ass on t he way out!

[Zombo]

9 hours ago, Apereg11 said:

Do you feel accomplished for attacking a child? At least the rest of the people here have the dignity to correct me with facts and offer suggestions for my survey. I don't understand how an adult can feel dignified by saying that.

What senior in high school calls himself a child?

Are you still breastfeeding? Or just too many participation awards?

You're a young man, act like it, don't play the child card anytime after 12 ... ever. Unless you really are gay, then that explains your lack of football knowledge.

Z

[The Gipper]

13 hours ago, Apereg11 said:

Yeah I'm just gonna stop responding to this thread because at this point it's a huge waste of time. I've had ZERO issues with the others team I'm investigating (I've posted my survey on fan forums for all the teams I'm looking at). This could just be because I'm a Ravens fan, or it could be because you all are just stubborn old men who won't take 30 seconds out of their day to help someone out (like seriously you won't die by filling out a survey that you deem to not be 100% accurate).  I've stated my reasons for the Browns 2018-2020 "rebrand" numerous times, so if any of you want to take the time to read the whole thread, be my guest. I'm not even going to give any of you the satisfaction of saying you "broke me down" or "defeated me" because you honestly didn't. I've never really had any negative views towards the Dawg Pound, but this whole discussion has really showed the true colors of the Browns faithful. I guess one positive that come out of this is that you guys truly do represent your team because just like a "dawg" once you bite, you don't ever let go. Good bye to you all.

It has fuck all to do with you being a Ravens fan....

And now you ARE  being a complete obstinate child.    And apparently,  ungrateful  as well.    All the things I and Gunz have done here to educate you to the truth, but  YOU are the one that turns around and show your true colors by being ungrateful for that,  and continuing on with your misguided, off base contentions.

Here is the point: "  Your"  reasons for  claiming the Browns have rebranded  are just wrong, absurd, and useless...and your research and conclusion will be so off base that they will  be drivel.....and we have tried to help you understand that, so that you can try to do things properly.  Better for you to hear this from us than your teacher. 

Your project, if you continue to include the Browns based on you incorrect assumptions  in it,  will be garbage, and we are trying to help you avoid that. 

And see, what you have actually run into here are not old men or Ravens haters...at least as it applies to you.   You have found a truly dedicated, knowledgeable, intelligent fan base  who is aware of their history and purpose.  It may be something you have never been exposed to before.

So, yes....dis-include the Browns from your study.  Your grade will be better for it.  As I have advised many times....replace them with the Raiders, who are really a more apt franchise for your research. 

[gumby73]

         Should have just took detention...

Ravenfan52 has a son?

[Tour2ma]

If I had the power, then I'd add to Zombo's interests... "Tough Love".

[Unsympathetic]

12 hours ago, Apereg11 said:

like seriously you won't die by filling out a survey

Like seriously you won't die by changing your proposed definition of "rebrand" to match reality.

12 hours ago, Apereg11 said:

I'm not even going to give any of you the satisfaction of saying you "broke me down" or "defeated me"

This thread isn't an attack on you - it's an attack on your strategy.  The definition is the entire thing whether you're capable of acknowledging it or not.

You had a hypothesis and data was presented which your hypothesis couldn't deal with.  Your hypothesis has to change.. it's objectively wrong.  Be willing to change when you're presented with new information that you hadn't considered.

Your emotion has nothing to do with it.  Nobody has the slightest care whether you're defeated or not.   Pro tip: Get over yourself. 

Even if your pride tells you that your acceptance of some content on this thread is "taking an L" - man to man, the better move would be to make the changes and walk away with the W of a paper that represents reality.  At present, you're wrong, and no amount of emotion changes that.

[Gunz41]

13 hours ago, Apereg11 said:

Yeah I'm just gonna stop responding to this thread because at this point it's a huge waste of time. I've had ZERO issues with the others team I'm investigating (I've posted my survey on fan forums for all the teams I'm looking at). This could just be because I'm a Ravens fan, or it could be because you all are just stubborn old men who won't take 30 seconds out of their day to help someone out (like seriously you won't die by filling out a survey that you deem to not be 100% accurate).  I've stated my reasons for the Browns 2018-2020 "rebrand" numerous times, so if any of you want to take the time to read the whole thread, be my guest. I'm not even going to give any of you the satisfaction of saying you "broke me down" or "defeated me" because you honestly didn't. I've never really had any negative views towards the Dawg Pound, but this whole discussion has really showed the true colors of the Browns faithful. I guess one positive that come out of this is that you guys truly do represent your team because just like a "dawg" once you bite, you don't ever let go. Good bye to you all.

Never ONCE was I anything but helpful to you.

You just have some kind of set thoughts and will not waiver or even look at another view. And you seem to be of the opinion that someone who doesn't agree is against you or trying to break you down.

But no sir, you did not explain your reasons why you considered it a rebrand. What you did say was incorrect (i.e. mentioned Stefanski). And you also did not explain AT ALL a thought process on a 2014 rebrand. 

If you can use any variables you want and it is just for a grade, then by all means go for it. But you stated you chose this topic because of you being interested in it. 

And from what I have read, 1 person on here has said something rude to you. Yet you classify everyone on here in a negative way, and even go as far as saying anyone who wouldn't help you isn't being decent. 

[Nero]

I didn't read through it all, but I think Unsympathetic has said it and I have to be sympathetic  (I'm so funny...) with his opinion, and say that what every team does every 3 years shouldn't be considered rebranding, or not as lightly as you seemingly have done.

It's a redesigning of the product, but it goes as far as changing the uniforms, fonts, and the style everything is portrayed to the media (banners, etc), but it isn't a full rebranding as the brand already exists and substantially keeps being the same. If I recall correctly, some friends I have doing that kind of stuff in publicity companies would call it ''branding'', but not ''rebranding''. 

[Zombo]

We rebranded the uniforms and logos only in 2020 and 2014. In 2018 all we did was draft well. That was four coaches and two GMs ago.

Z

[The Gipper]

I don't know if this kid would come back here....seeing that he is intimidated by facts.  But here is are  other "factoids"  he probably was not aware of:

Over the 28 year period from 1946 to  1973,    the Browns had    26 winning record seasons.   One  .500 season, and one losing season.   That one year being 1956, the hangover year after the retirement of Otto Graham. 

I don't know if any team has ever matched that record. 

Patriots I know may be fairly close.   And perhaps Cowboys.  

In checking:

Patriots, in 28 years since 1992  have had  5 losing seasons....3 of them at the beginning of the counting  and 1 .500 season. 

Dallas between 1965 and 1992  had  5 losing seasons and 1. .500 season. 

The Steelers in the last 28 years, same period as the Pats,  have only had 3 losing seasons....and 4  .500 seasons

The 49ers from 1980 to 2008 had 9 losing seasons. 

The Chicago Bears,   from 1920 to 1948  only had 2 losing seasons...and no .500 season   (Plus 3 more in a row after that.)  

The Green Bay Packers from 1921 to 1949  had only  3 losing seasons, and no .500 seasons. 

[Unsympathetic]

Other factoids that may interest only me:

On 12/9/2020 at 2:38 PM, Apereg11 said:

I have been researching marketing in sports for the past three months

In no particular order, on this thread, we have seen: Two business consultants each w >15 years of experience, an elected Ohio judge, 5 engineers, an experienced football coach, and a gumby. 

This isn't the Ravens forum for the insane traveling carnival magicians and homeless yoga instructors - people are actually professionals here.

 

[The Gipper]

42 minutes ago, Unsympathetic said:

Other factoids that may interest only me:

In no particular order, on this thread, we have seen: Two business consultants each w >15 years of experience, an elected Ohio judge, 5 engineers, an experienced football coach, and a gumby. 

This isn't the Ravens forum for the insane traveling carnival magicians and homeless yoga instructors - people are actually professionals here.

 

Actually I am not elected in my position. I am appointed. Assuming you were talking about me when you said Ohio judge. 

[Nero]

45 minutes ago, Unsympathetic said:

Other factoids that may interest only me:

In no particular order, on this thread, we have seen: Two business consultants each w >15 years of experience, an elected Ohio judge, 5 engineers, an experienced football coach, and a gumby. 

Some respect, please. I hope you're not calling me Engineer, I'm an Architect. 

Gumby could be considered Engineer of Words. 

[Dutch Oven]

This thread might be the biggest "Who gives a fuck?" thread I've seen on here in quite a while. 

Well done to everyone involved. 

[Nero]

8 hours ago, Dutch Oven said:

This thread might be the biggest "Who gives a fuck?" thread I've seen on here in quite a while. 

Well done to everyone involved. 

We try our best. 

I don't know why, but now I want to eat some cereals

[Gunz41]

13 hours ago, Unsympathetic said:

Other factoids that may interest only me:

In no particular order, on this thread, we have seen: Two business consultants each w >15 years of experience, an elected Ohio judge, 5 engineers, an experienced football coach, and a gumby. 

This isn't the Ravens forum for the insane traveling carnival magicians and homeless yoga instructors - people are actually professionals here.

 

Now I am trying to rack my brain to figure out who is who in this lol

So here is a good Gipper trivia. Identity the 10 people Unsympathetic is speaking of 

I think I can name 4. 

Gipper- Judge

Nero- Engineer (I think I remember)

Gumby- the tiny green bender

Gunz41- the dumb jock football coach

P.S.- The "presumed" high schooler that MUST know more than the aforementioned 10, apereg11. 

And by the way, I searched the other teams message boards that I could find, and the ONLY mention I found on rebranding was asked by a college professor I believe it was. Haha

[Nero]

5 hours ago, Gunz41 said:

Nero- Engineer (I think I remember)

Again. I'm an ARCHITECT.