Recommended Posts

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

Thanks for playing...

italy%20crest.png

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.

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;

"B) 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.

If I'm reading the rule right, Italy's use of stars as a part of the national emblem to denote World Cup wins is incorrect, because the rule requires the stars or other symbols to be "immediately adjacent to" the national emblem. I don't know any canons of construction that all one to render "immediately adjacent to" to mean "on top of" or "incorporated inside of."

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

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

Sports teams never care about the flag code. The flag itself, let alone versions of it, have been used on jerseys for... ever.

If I remember correctly even the display of it on NFL helmets is against code.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

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

I doubt it. How many other team USA logos use the correct red stripes/blue field design?

EDIT-

I don't know if this completely fixes the design, but it's an improvement....

6322.png

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

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

Sports teams never care about the flag code. The flag itself, let alone versions of it, have been used on jerseys for... ever.

If I remember correctly even the display of it on NFL helmets is against code.

It doesn't matter if it's against the Code or not. The Flag Code is completely uneforceable and parts of it were already legally struck down. There is nothing illegal about any use of the flag on uniforms.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You know, if Egypt can wear seven stars, then why can't the USA wear four?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If we're just recoloring the logo, here's my version--I didn't like the beveled stars, so I redid those and I also evened out the stripes.

US-Soccer-Updated-1.png

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well if we're all re-coloring, here's my altered logo from an earlier thread. Actually has 13 stripes, and 11 stars, representing each player on the pitch...

g4267.png

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If we're just recoloring the logo, here's my version--I didn't like the beveled stars, so I redid those and I also evened out the stripes.

US-Soccer-Updated-1.png

It's amazing that a simple color swap does wonders. That looks respectable now.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I have no problem with the stars themselves, but they really need to change the logo. I think a crest with simpler design elements (no bevel or 3-D looking ball) would be better.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

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.

Why not? The snake has a long history as a patriotic symbol. And it's more interesting than an eagle (as much as I like Speedy's design).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

and England doesn't use a star at all.

They've got one above their crest. It's hard to see though as it's white. It's simply embroidered on the shirt in white thread, so it has to be seen in the right light or on an HDTV or what have you.

If we're going to be throwing back to our national symbols to base the USMNT crest on, why not just use the shield from the Great Seal? It's got the red and white stripes (albiet reversed from the flag with seven white and six red stripes) and a starless blue field. Plus the shape of the shield is pretty unique (while the one that's currently used is a little on the generic side).

I think it'd be cool (for lack of a better term) to just use that shield as the crest with no alterations. It's extremely simple and both is a national symbol itself (or rather part of one) and incorporates elements from the flag. Plus, it has no stars, so the FIFA purists would be happy too.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Crest stars do not necessarily represent World Cup victories. For example, lots of African nation's soccer federations have stars over their badges to represent Africa Cup championships, and two of Uruguay's four stars stand for Olympic soccer victories.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well if we're all re-coloring, here's my altered logo from an earlier thread. Actually has 13 stripes, and 11 stars, representing each player on the pitch...

g4267.png

Game. Set. Match.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well if we're all re-coloring, here's my altered logo from an earlier thread. Actually has 13 stripes, and 11 stars, representing each player on the pitch...

g4267.png

Game. Set. Match.

I do like this too, but I like the gold as an unofficial 4th color of the US.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well if we're all re-coloring, here's my altered logo from an earlier thread. Actually has 13 stripes, and 11 stars, representing each player on the pitch...

g4267.png

Looks a lot like the NFL shield...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well if we're all re-coloring, here's my altered logo from an earlier thread. Actually has 13 stripes, and 11 stars, representing each player on the pitch...

g4267.png

Game. Set. Match.

I do like this too, but I like the gold as an unofficial 4th color of the US.

The colour gold should be nowhere near US Soccer.

To add my $0.02, I don't mind the US using stars, but the way it is currently executed is poor. Using three stars without a reason why is misleading.

I'm not opposed to using stars to denote things outside of world cup victories.

For example, Ghana uses a single star on their crest to symbolize the "black star" which is the countries nickname and on the flag, and Uruguay as mentioned earlier use 4 stars to denote both world cup and olympic victories, and both are fine in my books. However the use of 3 stars without reason reeks of poor execution on the US part, perhaps if each star meant something then I would be fine. I liked the 11 star concept from a previous poster.

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?

usasoccerlogo.jpg

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

Stars outside the crest symbolize previous championships. It's not just for Nations and World Cups. And by the way, we're not the only nation to have stars inside our crest.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

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

Thanks for playing...

italy%20crest.png

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.

Your argument is asinine and your sarcastic, condescending tone isn't even remotely funny or amusing. Do yourself a favor and read up a little on the sport before creating ridiculous threads such as this.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

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

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.

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:

51877829_d1662f9c67.jpg

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

A little off topic, but isn't that a volleyball and not a soccer ball???

Share this post


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