Club Badge (merged)

[GeekinGav]

I think the navy/gold is part of the inner circle Gav

yeah ... sorry ... i went all Melbourne City then ....

 

[Shaelumstash]

I get that mate, just think it doesn't belong in the crest, and would look fucking dreadful.

Would be too many colours going on for me, and would look too Coventry City for me.

I don't like the way Nike seem to be continually throwing Navy into our kits either, navy trim everywhere, sky blue shorts etc.

I know a lot of blues like the Navy socks, Ian above too, but they're not for me personally.

What I'd really like to see us do is adopt a specific kit template and just fucking stick with it. Really gets under my skin to see it change so often, just seems to disrespect our heritage and give the impression we have no tradition.

You wouldn't see Real in black shorts, Liverpool in white shorts, Arsenal in red shorts, Chelsea in white shorts, the scum in white socks etc etc.

Really quite irritating.

Wouldn't be against having Navy blue socks in the odd away to avoid colour clashes like we've done in recent years when we've worn the home kit, but besides that I think we should be Sky blue and white.

Mate you're singing to the choir with the sky blue shorts and Coventry City comparisons. Check out the thread I started on next years kit, and I've been posting about that for years.

The decision makers at the club know how unpopular these things are with the fans, they just choose not to listen.

Same with the badge. If they'd bothered to look on these threads over the last 3 years, they'd have a very good idea about which designs were overwhelmingly popular.

Instead they choose not to listen and choose to go for something "Modern, original" and shoe horn in as many symbols as possible.

I refuse to believe the club are too incompetent to take these things on board, I just think they don't really give a toss what lifelong blues think. Not if it gets in the way of their marketing strategy anyway.

 

[GeekinGav]

There is also this mockup (I use the word loosely) which claims to be what was shown to supporters in the early preview:

pic.twitter.com/O74lKracfl

We Clutter Til The End

 

[IanBishopsHaircut]

There is also this mockup (I use the word loosely) which claims to be what was shown to supporters in the early preview:

pic.twitter.com/O74lKracfl

Well that's bollocks as there's no 1894

 

[JoeMercer'sWay]

navy and gold, no maroon, urgh.

 

[IanBishopsHaircut]

yeah ... sorry ... i went all Melbourne City then ....

With the supposed 1894 in white I think we can safely assume the Rest of the lettering would be the same colour?

 

[GeekinGav]

and .... going off the "white S" .... think thats a 9 in 1894 ... in white ... think thats in the middle somehow.

 

[Eddybarker86]

Give us the OLD badge back. It's simple, clean and retro. I've a bad feeling there tying us up with nycfc and Melbourne as just one team with a different name, we need to be different we are citt after all and we're here well before bloody nycfc and melbourne

 

[blue b4 the moon]

The dark blue & gold isn't curved so must be part of the diagonal rivers.

 

[Shaelumstash]

and .... going off the "white S" .... think thats a 9 in 1894 ... in white ... think thats in the middle somehow.

The only way that could be the case mate is if the 1894 is written like this:

18
94