Wasn't 86 the date of formation of the current club?I’d like a Honey Badger on the 86 Badge with a new date from formation
I don't like the shield, the scrolls, the font, it's difficult to read when you aren't really close and it's a bit wonky when you are. The colour has a stupid gradient instead of a single colour.What is 'woeful' about it though?
The ribbony bits? The shield shape? They're both fairly commonly used on club crests.
Surely no one objects to the lion or the year.
Don't get me wrong, I don't love it, but that's largely because the club was completely synonymous with the 1986 badge for me until that point.
'Strongarm'Here we go View attachment 74049
I don't like the shield, the scrolls, the font, it's difficult to read when you aren't really close and it's a bit wonky when you are. The colour has a stupid gradient instead of a single colour.
It also has to be massive otherwise it is illegible. It doesn't scale at all.
Mainly there wasn't anything that was better about it than the previous badge except for the date.
It was a lot better. Great example on these stadium pictures. They are almost identical pictures (new badge is marginally smaller) but the old badge is perfectly legible. It's not even clear that the new badge has text on it.You couldn't read the 1986 badge from a distance either, it all blurred together in to red.
I like it but does there need to be space between 18 and 76?Here we go View attachment 74049
View attachment 74050
By Nick Budrewicz
I would agree there was nothing that was an improvement, but I still don't think it was completely toxic to the eyes as some say. But anyway, horses for courses.I don't like the shield, the scrolls, the font, it's difficult to read when you aren't really close and it's a bit wonky when you are. The colour has a stupid gradient instead of a single colour.
It also has to be massive otherwise it is illegible. It doesn't scale at all.
Mainly there wasn't anything that was better about it than the previous badge except for the date.
Please please announce this MFC, even if its just as an April fool....AI didn’t quite grasp the assignment View attachment 74051
Agree, the rampant lion has been a constant hasn't it? No need to change it.In my opinion we need to retain the existing Lion. I don’t want a new take on the lion. I don’t think it’s necessary.
A sort of belated apology from Gibson about the Stockton/Mackem nonsense in 2009?