USMNT

[CreamSoda]

The stars only count as titles if they are outside of the crest design.

Thanks for playing...

In fact, those stars are identical to the ones in the USA crest.

Sorry but I have yet to hear a good reason why this is allowed properly. All the other logos posted featured the flags itself, not a symbolic representation with a clear knock off of the FIFA stars for championships.

[The Swamp Yankee]

Seriously? Look at our flag. We're the stars and stripes. Why is that so difficult to understand? Plus, we've never been a country to follow the rules.

[Titanole]

The stars only count as titles if they are outside of the crest design.

Thanks for playing...

In fact, those stars are identical to the ones in the USA crest.

Sorry but I have yet to hear a good reason why this is allowed properly. All the other logos posted featured the flags itself, not a symbolic representation with a clear knock off of the FIFA stars for championships.

So most Cup winners have stars apart from their badge, but since Italy incorporates theirs into their crest the U.S. shouldn't have stars, even though everyone who isn't an idiot knows they haven't won the World Cup three times? I think you are just arguing for the sake of arguing.

[Gothamite]

No, I get what he's saying.

In Italian football, the reigning champs get to wear the scudetto. It's a small patch of the Italian flag. Now, what would people say if an Italian club just happened to add a flag patch to their shirts? Maybe it wouldn't be exactly the same size, maybe it wouldn't be exactly the same shape. It probably wouldn't be against any regulations, but they'd certainly be called out as poseurs. And rightfully so.

I think the US might be grandfathered in - according to Wikipedia, for what it's worth (I know, I know...), the first national team to wear a star signifying a World Cup was Brazil in 1970. Then Italy in 1982, and everybody since then. I don't know what the US MNT was wearing then, but perhaps they already used stars.

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

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.

That's because you've picked up somebody's joke logo.

The actual DTOM crest commonly has a Nike Swoosh on it (since it was created by Nike and is sold exclusively on Nike merchandise), so a poster here (can't remember who), replaced the tongue with a swoosh.

Here's the real one:

Without the swoosh, I think the US would be wise to adopt that. So much better than anything they've actually worn.

[Sodboy13]

The three stars on Team USA's crest represent the goals scored in their match against Slovenia.

[mightynine]

As much as I like the DTOM design for fan gear, I wouldn't be excited with using it as the actual badge. Something like this is all you need:

[Red Wolf]

The USA's stars aren't gold, so there's that. And as has been mentioned a million times before (but somehow isn't a good enough answer), the USA's known for stars and stripes. It's really that simple.

[-kj]

Without the swoosh, I think the US would be wise to adopt that. So much better than anything they've actually worn.

But it's still not good for a USSF crest.

Speedy's been using his concept from a couple of years ago as his avatar; after going back and finding that thread again the other day, I still think it's brilliant.

[YELDARBfield]

Speedy's been using his concept from a couple of years ago as his avatar; after going back and finding that thread again the other day, I still think it's brilliant.

For reference: US Mens National Team Concept by Speedy

[shaydre1019]

I think, and i'm sure many would agree with me, that a bigger question should be why in the world do we have stars(which i personally am not a fan of) on a red background, and blue stripes it just doesn't make sense, a bouncing soccer ball doesn't help either.

[rmackman]

The stars only count as titles if they are outside of the crest design.

Thanks for playing...

In fact, those stars are identical to the ones in the USA crest.

Sorry but I have yet to hear a good reason why this is allowed properly. All the other logos posted featured the flags itself, not a symbolic representation with a clear knock off of the FIFA stars for championships.

So most Cup winners have stars apart from their badge, but since Italy incorporates theirs into their crest the U.S. shouldn't have stars, even though everyone who isn't an idiot knows they haven't won the World Cup three times? I think you are just arguing for the sake of arguing.

If we can't have stars on our badge, Italy shouldn't be allowed to wear blue. At least our badge has parts of our flag on it. No blue in Italy's flag, but it's allowed on the soccer team. While we're at it, Mexico can't wear black, England can't have lions on the badge because that's too closet to a Puma, and France has a big chicken on theirs while I prefer steak. SO THERE! LAY OFF THE USA!

[poser47]

The three stars represent the three branches of the organization (Youth, Adult, Pro ... before the recognition of the fourth branch: Athletes)

it was launched in 1995 in conjunction with Nike coming on board.

http://www.facebook.com/topic.php?uid=32421823940&topic=12284

[-kj]

I think, and i'm sure many would agree with me, that a bigger question should be why in the world do we have stars(which i personally am not a fan of) on a red background, and blue stripes it just doesn't make sense, a bouncing soccer ball doesn't help either.

Now that's a quite valid question, and one to which I can't come up with a particularly good answer.

[rams80]

I thought the stars were a symbolic representation for the US' only finish in the Top 4 of World Cup play.

For what it's worth, I'm pretty sure gold is one of the colors of the US Presidency at the least, and possibly the government in general, and has been previously used in "Team USA" athletic regalia for that reason.

Also, given CreamSoda's past history of generally being an instigating prat, I think he's just picking yet another fight for the Lulz. Given how intrinsic stars are to depictions of American identity, (like the Maple Leaf to Canadians) of course we have every right to incorporate them into our Team USA badges regardless of what Soccer's royalty does.

[shaydre1019]

While we're on the topic, does anyone know when/how this logo came about?

I've seen it floating around for a while now.

[-kj]

I dunno, I keep seeing it on the shirts the US players are wearing.

[shaydre1019]

Really? Because i keep seeing this version with stripes equal in width, and with all the stars colored the same way.

I just wanna know if the first one is official and if so, when they transitioned to this one.

[Gfonk04]

http://www.fifa.com/mm/document/tournament/competition/51/54/30/equipment_reg_26032010_en.pdf

See page 39. "Member Associations that have won one or more of the previous editions of the FIFA World Cup? or the FIFA Women?s World Cup? may display on the Playing Equipment used by their first men?s or women?s representative teams a five-pointed star, or other symbol..." (emphasis added). And: "The five-pointed star(s) shall be positioned as follows:

"a) on the front of the shirt at chest level, immediately adjacent to the Official Member Association Emblem;

" on the front of the shorts immediately adjacent to the Official Member Association Emblem; and/or

"c) on the socks"

Before taking a hack at one design, check out the rules governing the design first. According to the rules, a star does not necessarily denote a championship (England could use a picture of the Queen if they wanted, as long as FIFA approves it), the star could be in or nowhere near the crest (the socks? Seriously?). Women's teams wear their stars on the collar or sleeves. And this rule was enacted after the practice had already started informally. If Brazil had chosen a smiley face, then the above rule would probably say "...a smiley face, or other symbol..." and the US would be safe from ridicule.

The idea that the US is disrespecting other nations by using its own national symbol (i.e. a star) is ridiculous. Now, the swapped color question, that's a different story.

[maz]

If there is one thing that bugs me the most about it, its how the stripes are blue and the field with the stars is red. Totally ruins the symbolism of the actual flag. Other than that im not too unhappy with it. The stars don't bother me.

Though the nike crest is superior, hands down.

[walkerws]

It may have been done that way due to the US Flag Code.