Jump to content

Rumoured new Everton crest


Louis

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 47
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Hmm. Less busy, but keeps the essential quality. And no gradient; going to presume that's a bad repro, and the wavy lines aren't actually part of it.

I think I like it, although I never approve of dropping a motto (looking at you, north London).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I really do not like it. Nearly everything is wrong. The shield is the wrong (and unnecessary without the marquee) shape, the text 'Everton' and '1878' doesn't need to be included. The tower looks like clip-art and they have removed the laurels.

GQ3lhIP.jpg

qORhpHM.jpg

It looks like a cost-reducing measure for the kit manufacturer.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Downgrade for me, just too plain. Maybe if they had kept the old tower it might not look so plain..

OT ish: How come there aren't more EPL logos on the mothership?

IIRC (and a bit of a tl;dr explanation), Chris had them all up there once and then pretty much all of the clubs threatened lawsuit and he took them down.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 1 month later...

http://www.evertonfc...e-everton-crest

It's been confirmed. There's a few videos and things that people may be interested in.

Fans see it as heavily influenced by Nike, wanting to reduce their own costs to reproduce it.

As well as the Everton fan-base, key commercial partners such as Kitbag and Nike were also consulted. Both organisations have huge knowledge and experience of sports branding and their input was invaluable.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

http://www.evertonfc...e-everton-crest

It's been confirmed. There's a few videos and things that people may be interested in.

Fans see it as heavily influenced by Nike, wanting to reduce their own costs to reproduce it.

As well as the Everton fan-base, key commercial partners such as Kitbag and Nike were also consulted. Both organisations have huge knowledge and experience of sports branding and their input was invaluable.

I like the change, adds much needed simplification while maintaining what was necessary.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The main criticism from supporters seems to be the omission of the Latin motto "Nil Satis Nisi optimum."

Can't they easily correct that by creating another logo with the above new crest and the motto below it? They could continue using the crest above for most marketing and advertising and have the one with the motto on a wall here and there in the stadium and on letter head or something. I think a crest with the motto would be way too busy for television broadcasts, on uniforms, and other media. But I could be completely wrong.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

An alternate crest would solve the problem, but alts really aren't as much of the culture there as here. Americans accept that their teams will have two, three or four logos. Not so much the case over there.

I know with Arsenal, recently they've taken to selling gear with just the cannon, but that's a relatively recent thing. I think a whole second crest would seem unfathomable to them.

The more I see it, the more I dislike the tower.

I get the need for simplifying the crest, but the tower looks wrong.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I hate to say it but I don't like either of them (old or new).

Its surprising to me at how European soccer fans seem to have generally accepted the new soccer kit designs and all of the other new trends that have been prevalent in soccer in recent years but seem to be completely rigid when it comes to a logo change. I've always looked at the rest of the world to be more tolerable to these types of changes and for American sports fans to be more rigid. Go figure.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It's because they have a long tradition of kit changes, going back decades.

What they don't have is a history of changing the things that matter: colors, crests and general layout. Arsenal is always red with white sleeves. Chelsea is always blue over blue with white socks. Man U is a red shirt, white shorts and a touch of black. Etc, etc. Their uniform changes, while scheduled and regular, don't often involve the sort of upheaval standard in ours.

Color changes are very rare. They don't have teams like the Astros, who have had four completely different (and incompatible) color schemes over the last twenty years. The Mariners. The Rays. The Brewers. The Mets. The Marlins. The Padres (several times). And that's just baseball, off the top of my head. Any one of those overhauls would have been unheard of in football.

The details change often, but the big-picture elements stay constant through it all. Given that context, I can understand the fans being less-than-thrilled with this crest change.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Goes to show you making a branding mistake is easily fixable if you admit fault, move on, and take in more user opinion. It can actually be a unique opportunity if handled correctly.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.



×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use.