Recommended Posts

Does anybody else find it odd that the USMNT has three stars in their badge? Those stars are usually reserved for Nations that have won the World Cup. Is there another reason behind the USA putting three iconic stars in their badge despite never winning a WC?

usasoccerlogo.jpg

I would be kinda upset if I was Brazil, Italy, Uruguay, Germany, France, England or Argentina.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Does anybody else find it odd that the USMNT has three stars in their badge? Those stars are usually reserved for Nations that have won the World Cup. Is there another reason behind the USA putting three iconic stars in their badge despite never winning a WC?

If only there were stars featured in some iconic representation of the country, like our flag or something.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

wow, nice response. You really get it, thanks.

Anybody with any real knowledge?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

wow, nice response. You really get it, thanks.

Anybody with any real knowledge?

So simple logic like the stars are a symbol of the country isn't good enough for you? That's basically it. There's no other reason for them to be there. They don't represent any titles.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

My point is why are they allowed to use that iconic FIFA world cup representation of previous championships in their badge?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

No, its not odd that we use stars because, as mightynine delicately put it, stars (like the stripes on the same badge) are a large part of our national identity. Yes it is odd that there are only three. Usually gold stars are reserved for cup champions and are sort of separate of the actual badge itself.

Brazil: Not gold, but clearly separate from the crest.

BRAZIL%20CREST.png

Germany:

logo-football-germany-dfb1.jpg

Both of these are added above the traditional crest. I know Uruguay, Argentina and France do the same, and England doesn't use a star at all.

Italy is the only one that really incorporates them into their crest, but the stars are gold. So as far as they're concerned, our stars are just ugly additions to a sad outdated logo.

What i want to know is:

1. Why are the stripes blue and the stars on a red plane?

2. Why are the stars two-toned?

3. Why haven't we changed that mess of a logo?

4. Just, why?

USA USA USA and Hup Holland

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

My point is why are they allowed to use that iconic FIFA world cup representation of previous championships in their badge?

Obviously, FIFA's signed off on it, since the badge has been in use for quite a while now. And looking at the examples posted of other stars, the ones in the US badge are quite different.

I think you're just overthinking this one.

(As an aside, I'd love for a redesign of that badge.)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

wow, nice response. You really get it, thanks.

Anybody with any real knowledge?

So simple logic like the stars are a symbol of the country isn't good enough for you? That's basically it. There's no other reason for them to be there. They don't represent any titles.

No, and it's not good enough for me either. In soccer stars are used to represent championships. Even if they're on the badge and not separate, it still looks stupid. Is there any logic whatsoever to using three stars? That right there adds to the confusion. The stars on the US badge don't even resemble our flag in any way (you could use the argument that the bevel is similar to the way stars are stitched onto the flag, but that's a pretty big stretch IMO). It looks like the crest was designed by someone with absolutely no knowledge of soccer who said, "Hey, other successful countries have stars somewhere, why not use them ourselves? In fact, even though it's not one of our national colors, and we haven't won a damn thing either, lets use gold too!" Overall, it's a pretty awful crest, and this problem could be solved by using this logo, or something similar to it

us-soccer-dont-tread-on-me.gif

Although I think it's a Nike logo and probably wouldn't be approved. Either way, it's still head and shoulders above the 90s MLS looking crest they currently use.

EDIT: WOW, I just noticed the Nike Swoosh tongue. Talk about logo creep to the max.

It's still a pretty kick ass logo...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
In fact, even though it's not one of our national colors, and we haven't won a damn thing either, lets use gold too!

fringe.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
In fact, even though it's not one of our national colors, and we haven't won a damn thing either, lets use gold too!

fringe.jpg

But still, it has very little to do with our national colors. In fact, gold isn't even listed as a secondary color. The gold trimmed flags were meant to only be used by the military inside of buildings (although this isn't always respected), and was in some ways even meant as showing respect to France and the help given during WWII. :censored:, it's not even the same shade of gold.

And add the fact that gold is usually used, at least in soccer, to denote championships, and it looks completely out of place.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thank you Bucsfan

That was my point. There would have to be some actual point to using gold stars not just our flag as them.

To me it is a huge disrespect to Nations that have actually won the World Cup and takes away from the prestige of the stars in other nations a little.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

As the admiral has just alluded to, gold is used for fringe on the flag. It is also just a nice tertiary color to offset the bold red and blue. Other US national teams, like USA hockey, have used silver for the same purpose. See also Team Canada for uses of silver and gold. If it were like lime green or something, I could see the questioning of it. But a basic metallic color? I don?t think it needs too much justification.

In regards to the stars, while they may be a traditional symbol for championships in soccer, it is also a symbol of the country. Nobody seems to give Ghana flak for using a star. A black star is on their flag and is a symbol for them just as stars, typically plain white, are for the United States.

So why then does the USMNT use nautical stars? I can't be sure, but to me it seems like it might be an attempt to distance itself from championship stars and avoid this whole conversation. Stars to denote championships, as I have always seen them, are just plain 5 pointed stars as seen in the Brazil and Germany examples. So using more ornate, designed stars could be a way of using stars while denoting that they are a design element and not an add on to denote championships.

And why 3? The simple answer would seem to be that 3 fit the shape best. The top of the shield has 3 points, dividing it into two halves. One on each side and then a slightly bigger one in the middle to fill the slightly bigger space created by the rising center point. Honestly I don't think there is too much more to it than that. If I had that shield shape and I wanted to put stars in it somewhere, I'd probably use 3 stars there too. Just because it fits. Not because the amount of stars signify anything special.

I don't want to get too off topic here, but I'd also like to quickly address the "Don't Tread On Me" design fanaticism brought up by Bucfan. The current USMNT national crest, while not the greatest design, does use national symbols of stars and stripes. Another good national symbol they could use would be a bald eagle. But a snake? It's not a national symbol. Yes, yes, I know about the Gadsden flag and Ben Franklin?s ?Join or Die? cartoon, but the rattlesnake is not a national symbol. As a symbol for Uncle Sam?s Army or something I have no problem with it. But to be the used as a representative symbol of our nation by an official body such as the United States Soccer Federation it is inappropriate.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well, the United States has won two World Cups. Not the World Cup people actually care about but World Cups nonetheless.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

the stars are above the crest for World Cup Victories or any significant achievement look at club soccer for example i don't think there is even a rule about it

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Put me in the camp that wishes that they'd switch to if not the rattlesnake logo, something different. As has been said, although the stars are of American symbology, their positioning at the top of the logo does give the allusion that they're representing championships. Heck, even though the Germans use it, I wouldn't mind seeing something eagle-based. Just something better than what we have now, which might as well be an AYSO corporate logo.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Stars are part of certain countries' visual histories. If you're asking this question about the U.S., you must ask it about Ghana (the Black Stars) and Liberia (the Lone Stars) as well: both countries that feature stars both on their national flags and national team crests. I'm sure there are others. Some of these histories and flags have been around long before the World Cup, and long before the stars came to symbolize championships. Just because FIFA chose the star as a universal symbol of championship does not mean that it is disqualified as a design element from crests of countries to which the star holds meaningful symbolism. If I had it my way, the U.S. crest would have a ring of 13 stars, just like the Betsy Ross.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

- The stars are inside the crest, and are therefore part of the crest design. They aren't commemorating anything other than the US' design history.

- Stars only are commemorating a WC win if they are outside of the crest design, as in the case with the two examples listed above.

- The gold border is there to parallel the gold fringe on the elaborately displayed flags.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think the stars are perfectly fine, because our flag is largely composed of them. We're not the only country who has stars on the crest either, and as others have stated, they are not placed above the crest (typical way to denote championships won). Also, I believe the three stars are used to illustrate the three branches of the soccer federation (men's, women's, and youth).

Am I saying it is a perfect design? No, but I don't think it's horrible. I think something more along the lines of the 1950 crest would be amazing, but what we have now is fine, and we've built our federation around it, so I think it's here to stay.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Really? This again? *sigh* Alright...

Yes, we all know that national teams generally use stars to represent World Cup titles that they've won. Everyone knows this, it's fact. It's also an exceptionally tired argument against the US national team using stars in its crest. Sure, argue all you want that it's a bit of an ugly crest; in fact, I won't disagree with that. But to say that the Stars and Stripes shouldn't use, you know, stars in its logo? Really?

I vaguely remember posting up, probably years ago, the national team crests around the globe that use stars in some way. Unfortunately, the search function on the boards hasn't been very helpful, so I'll recreate the list for you. I'll only include five-pointed stars.

I'm pretty sure I can't show all of the images in a single post, so I'll give you links instead:

Algeria

Bahrain (it's abstract, but I'm counting it)

Belarus (national coat of arms on shirt, not FA logo)

Burkina Faso

Cameroon

Central African Republic (inconclusive as to if they wear that, but their flag features the same motif)

Chile (apparently a new logo that Wikipedia doesn't have)

China (flag, not the FA logo)

Comoros (inconclusive as to if they wear that, but their flag features four stars)

Cook Islands

Cuba (use flag, not logo)

Djibouti

Ghana

Guinea-Bissau

Honduras (five!)

Indonesia (national coat of arms on shirt, not FA logo)

Latvia

Liberia

Mauritania (inconclusive as to use, but flag uses star)

Morocco

Mozambique (use flag instead of logo)

North Korea (flag, not logo, which contains flag anyway)

Panama

Papua New Guinea

Paraguay

Sao Tome and Principe (inconclusive as to if they use that, but their flag has two stars anyway)

Senegal

Solomon Islands (TEN!)

Somalia

Syria (flag instead of logo; both have TWO stars)

Tajikistan (Seven!)

Togo

Tunisia

Turkey (use flag on shirt, not FA logo)

Vietnam (flag, not logo; star on both)

By my count, there are thirty-five international teams wearing five-pointed stars on their shirt for reasons other than denoting championships. Why is it, again, that only the US gets stick for this?

---

Completely unrelated, but my search did turn up these kits for Vanuatu:

blogimg_144_10411-20090521151831614463.jpg

Wow.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.