Club Badge (merged)

aguero93:20 said:
Well I never disputed that so I'm still trying to figure out why you posted that reply to me.
Click to expand...

I said the latin scroll was invented in 1997 by a Kappa designer.

You said you doubted it.

Perhaps you should have been clearer that you didn't doubt the 1997 bit, you only doubted the ludicrous idea that it was someone from Kappa who designed it.

Just on another note, is there any reason you doubt it was a graphic designer from Kappa who came up with it? Or just a hunch? Do you have any other hunches about who might have come up with the latin?

As I've said, personally it makes no odds who invented it. The important thing is that it was invented in 1997 and had no relevance to the club before that.

I actually don't mind the latin, but the stars and the eagle have to go.
 
willy eckerslike said:
We should just have an MCFC monogram. None of the images we have ever had mean anything. The stripes belong to a 14th century family coat of arms, the ships never reached Manchester and stopped at Salford, the rose belongs to another county. If anything the eagle is the most valid image.
Click to expand...
Could you please give the address of your care worker? I would like to write them/him/her
a stiff letter!
 
Mick Peek designed the 1997 badge. He was employed by MCFC not Kappa.

For those wondering.....

The Latin Motto did not exist as a City motto at all prior to summer 1997. In some of the early material released by City back then they misspelt proelio and, ever since, others have incorrectly written it as praelia, proelia and other combinations of letters. In the 50s there was a City motto (something about 'wanton fires' and desire) but it was a full sentence and may have been perfect for the period but not appropriate all these years later. Maybe some feel the same about a Latin motto from the 90s (not giving my view, just pointing out that mottos can be in and out of fashion - would a new motto of Fight To The End. For example, be appropriate for a different generation to 1997?).

Rivers - as I say in the talks I've been doing, the council no longer say they represent the rivers, but they don't give an alternative meaning and are vague on them. City, however, has always claimed they represent the 3 rivers of Manchester (Irwell, Irk & Medlock). These go right into the centre of Manchester and were/are the reason Manchester existed at all. Those rivers were the lifeblood of the city and helped a community to become established. When the De Grelley family crest was created those rivers were here. They may have influenced the crest, we just don't know, but we do know that at the time MCFC started using their own badge the emblazoned lines represented the rivers - that's what was widely believed and so that point stands.

The De Grelley crest - I.e. The 3 lines - are the oldest symbol associated with Manchester, and the oldest part of Manchester's coat of arms, predating the ship and everything else.

Having said that... Some fans associate more with the red rose which also has strong Manchester symbolism, having been on the City of Manchester's coat of arms longer than MCFC has existed. It is representative of the Duke of Lancaster, and maybe future use by City could symbolise England (slight redesign?). If it matters to readers - if any element matters - then please complete the Cityzens questionnaire. It's the only way of ensuring MCFC get your views.
 
Gary James said:
would a new motto of Fight To The End. For example, be appropriate for a different generation to 1997?)
Click to expand...

Gary can you sincerely express to the owners that this would not be acceptable in any format

Having that lump of gorgonzola on our badge would be akin to having 'Cityzens' on the crest and would make us a laughing stock

A 100% No
 
George Hannah said:
"Having followed this thread from the start i would suggest the consensus is breaking down as follows:

Want:
Simple Round Badage.
Crest including the 3 ‘rivers’ and the ship. (drop the M.C.F.C.).
Full club title in the outer circle.
Reference to 1894

People keep mentioning / but no majority support for
ST Marks / Maltese cross
The latin bit
The eagle
The rose
A bee
Three stars
Other weird stuff"

Slightly re-edited for historical accuracy and with graffiti removed
Click to expand...

That's basically the old badge. The club ain't going to do that. Some people on here need to deal with that fact.
 
nijinsky69 said:
That's basically the old badge. The club ain't going to do that. Some people on here need to deal with that fact.
Click to expand...
Gaudion M (whose post that is) has carefully followed this thread and tallied the contents. His summary is a fair representation of the consensus view on here and it ill behoves you or anyone else to criticise him. The agreed core elements are entirely compatible with a new badge and do not require a return to an earlier one.
It is quite wrong to try and tell folk with honest opinions what the club will or won't decide when you don't have a scooby.
 
Gary James said:
Mick Peek designed the 1997 badge. He was employed by MCFC not Kappa.

For those wondering.....

The Latin Motto did not exist as a City motto at all prior to summer 1997. In some of the early material released by City back then they misspelt proelio and, ever since, others have incorrectly written it as praelia, proelia and other combinations of letters. In the 50s there was a City motto (something about 'wanton fires' and desire) but it was a full sentence and may have been perfect for the period but not appropriate all these years later. Maybe some feel the same about a Latin motto from the 90s (not giving my view, just pointing out that mottos can be in and out of fashion - would a new motto of Fight To The End. For example, be appropriate for a different generation to 1997?).

Rivers - as I say in the talks I've been doing, the council no longer say they represent the rivers, but they don't give an alternative meaning and are vague on them. City, however, has always claimed they represent the 3 rivers of Manchester (Irwell, Irk & Medlock). These go right into the centre of Manchester and were/are the reason Manchester existed at all. Those rivers were the lifeblood of the city and helped a community to become established. When the De Grelley family crest was created those rivers were here. They may have influenced the crest, we just don't know, but we do know that at the time MCFC started using their own badge the emblazoned lines represented the rivers - that's what was widely believed and so that point stands.

The De Grelley crest - I.e. The 3 lines - are the oldest symbol associated with Manchester, and the oldest part of Manchester's coat of arms, predating the ship and everything else.

Having said that... Some fans associate more with the red rose which also has strong Manchester symbolism, having been on the City of Manchester's coat of arms longer than MCFC has existed. It is representative of the Duke of Lancaster, and maybe future use by City could symbolise England (slight redesign?). If it matters to readers - if any element matters - then please complete the Cityzens questionnaire. It's the only way of ensuring MCFC get your views.
Click to expand...

Supremely informative as always Gary, many thanks for your contribution to this whole process, it's been really insightful.
 
IanBishopsHaircut said:
Gary can you sincerely express to the owners that this would not be acceptable in any format

Having that lump of gorgonzola on our badge would be akin to having 'Cityzens' on the crest and would make us a laughing stock

A 100% No
Click to expand...
I only used that as an example of how mottos can date and not be relevant. I've had people tell me in recent months that Pride in Battle is an 'ancient' MCFC motto - no, it was invented in 1997. Similarly, Blue Moon was not sung (in a footballing context) by City fans prior to 1989. Ardwick AFC did not simply change its name to MCFC in 1894. The Red Rose badge was not worn by the 1st team between 1976 and 1981. The women's team did exist more than 2 years ago (as MCFC Ladies from 1988). Mufc did wear the eagle in 58, not a Phoenix. It's an antelope not a unicorn on the Manchester COA. The white cross was not St Marks (the white cross photo is believed to be Gorton AFC in 1884). There's no evidence found saying that the old Ardwick emblem was blue and white. City did not wear the coat of arms in every major final prior to 2011. The ship's final flag has not always faced the wrong way. The ship does not represent the Manchester ship canal etc. etc. etc.

For anyone wondering, all those points I mention are true.
 
Gary James said:
I only used that as an example of how mottos can date and not be relevant. I've had people tell me in recent months that Pride in Battle is an 'ancient' MCFC motto - no, it was invented in 1997. Similarly, Blue Moon was not sung (in a footballing context) by City fans prior to 1989. Ardwick AFC did not simply change its name to MCFC in 1894. The Red Rose badge was not worn by the 1st team between 1976 and 1981. The women's team did exist more than 2 years ago (as MCFC Ladies from 1988). Mufc did wear the eagle in 58, not a Phoenix. It's an antelope not a unicorn on the Manchester COA. The white cross was not St Marks (the white cross photo is believed to be Gorton AFC in 1884). There's no evidence found saying that the old Ardwick emblem was blue and white. City did not wear the coat of arms in every major final prior to 2011. The ship's final flag has not always faced the wrong way. The ship does not represent the Manchester ship canal etc. etc. etc.

For anyone wondering, all those points I mention are true.
Click to expand...
The white cross being worn by Gorton is a bit of a shaker!
 
George Hannah said:
The white cross being worn by Gorton is a bit of a shaker!
Click to expand...
The club went through several incarnations before Gorton AFC was established in 1884 and that photo was only identified in 2002 but and its possible (though unlikely) that this isn't Gorton anyway, though I believe it is. What the white cross actually signifies is also unknown. This was not a church team in 1884, but even if it was the cross can have different meanings based on an individual's faith, nationality etc.

I have talked quite a bit on all the elements and past badges in my talks. I just wish all fans had been able to attend and listen. Cheers
 
aguero93:20 said:
A point I never disputed. You've done poor Mick Peek a disservice though.
Click to expand...

You did dispute it, but it may have been unintentional, or you may just be back tracking.

Either way, I'll never forgive Micky Peek for lumbering us with that silly bird for the last 20 years. Fingers crossed we won't have to suffer for much longer :-)
 
Shaelumstash said:
You did dispute it, but it may have been unintentional, or you may just be back tracking.

Either way, I'll never forgive Micky Peek for lumbering us with that silly bird for the last 20 years. Fingers crossed we won't have to suffer for much longer :-)
Click to expand...

Nope, I made it very clear from the start, you've just insisted on chasing the date for some reason and then going on about Italians and stars and how it must have been an Italian Kappa employee because the badge was 'continental'. Woops.

Edit: Oh and the Eagle will stay, they'll be canvassing fans all over the globe and what do you think they recognise most easily of all the elements on the badge?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Unread Posts

Don't have an account? Register now and see fewer ads!

SIGN UP
Back
Top