I totally disagree. I just like them better with logos.
Although a blank helmet is acceptable, I don't get why you wouldn't want a logo. It's something that fans relate to. I mean, they pretty much just went and made their own 'logo' with all their bulldog stuff. There's no reason not to cash in on that and make a bulldog your logo, really.
"TwinkieGorilla" wrote:
not friends with many Browns fans, are you?
"Rockmolder" wrote:
No, but I do have about a 100 more FC Groningen, Ajax and PSV fans than you. Erm...
I get your point and in time, I bet that the Brown color has taken on some kind of a fanbase, but I still think that a logo is better. Both for marketing purposes and for new fans to relate to a franchise.
Let me just put it like this. As a foreign fan, the Browns look very blank and boring. I have no location to base my team on. Not saying that the Browns would be out of the question, but they're just so... boring.
At this point, I think that history is pulling them through. And that's after the franchise actually moved away from Cleveland already.
I just think that the franchise would be more recognizable and easier to notice if they, for instance, would to start this logo.