tiny_jacky
Player Valuation: £950k
3 is much better. But I guess we would end up with 1.
- Status
Struggling to understand how badge number 1 is a ridiculous choice. Clearly it's the overwhelmingly popular design and it shows that the approach taken by the club with the survey was correct. The survey clearly indicated one type of design would be the strongest and that is what the three designs have shown. There is no point in choosing something just because it's new, it's about choosing something which suits both the commercial needs of the club, and the demands of the fanbase.
Last edited:
slimspek
Player Valuation: £8m
Looking at them again, its like they played it way too safe. They saw that majority of fans liked the old crest (and the ones similar to it) and just recycled it. I mean out of all the choices 3 is the only one that actually dares to do something different (well only shape is different). I don't like the beehive badge but at least it was different and had something fresh about it even if no one liked it. Better to have tried and failed miserably than to have not tried at all? Granted I much prefer these new choices to the beehive.
I like 1 but it just feels old to me, not 'historic' just old. 3 isn't brilliant but its not horrific and it looks decent on the shirt. I would be content with either. 2 is just a big no no.
I like 1 but it just feels old to me, not 'historic' just old. 3 isn't brilliant but its not horrific and it looks decent on the shirt. I would be content with either. 2 is just a big no no.
DownunderToffee
Player Valuation: £15m
Number 2 looks horrid.
Number 1 is the safe choice, clearly going off past designs.
Number 3 is new and unique but not sure how I feel about it.
Can't see the public taking the chance on Number 3, I believe we'll get Number 1.
Number 1 is the safe choice, clearly going off past designs.
Number 3 is new and unique but not sure how I feel about it.
Can't see the public taking the chance on Number 3, I believe we'll get Number 1.
carolinablue232
Player Valuation: £70m
3 looks like a crest inside another crest. I like the inner design, but there is too much with the outer portion. It's 1 for me. Yes it's safe, but it's tasteful and looks good.
Can we add this as option #4 in the poll?
StDomingosGringo
Player Valuation: £10m
My random and completely uninformed design thoughts...
1. I noticed the first option is presented in a much more matt or monotone way than the second and third. Not counting the obvious amber on option 2, the blue used has variation in both the others.
2. The addition of amber trim is easy with any of the 3 and might suit all depending on the strip colour so adding it just to one design muddies the water. I agree Option 1 could look much better with a little amber. Option 3 on the other hand might truly getting into Pompey territory if you add an amber border.
3. Where did retaining the shield shape come in the importance surveys? Folk at the meetings posting here suggested it was more negotiable than most of the other elements despite the childhood nostalgia for most of our fan demographic.The choices seem to place high importance, but I bet there weren't too many of those folk who were wanting to lose the traditional shield only to adopt the Stoke/Pompey shield shape. If they were going to give us a third changed shape option they should have had the balls to offer a circular effort similar to the many good ones posted here.
Personally I'll vote for 1 but more to avoid 2 which is only marginally better than current travesty and 3 because I'm slightly more traditional than I thought in terms of shield shape if we're going that route.
1. I noticed the first option is presented in a much more matt or monotone way than the second and third. Not counting the obvious amber on option 2, the blue used has variation in both the others.
2. The addition of amber trim is easy with any of the 3 and might suit all depending on the strip colour so adding it just to one design muddies the water. I agree Option 1 could look much better with a little amber. Option 3 on the other hand might truly getting into Pompey territory if you add an amber border.
3. Where did retaining the shield shape come in the importance surveys? Folk at the meetings posting here suggested it was more negotiable than most of the other elements despite the childhood nostalgia for most of our fan demographic.The choices seem to place high importance, but I bet there weren't too many of those folk who were wanting to lose the traditional shield only to adopt the Stoke/Pompey shield shape. If they were going to give us a third changed shape option they should have had the balls to offer a circular effort similar to the many good ones posted here.
Personally I'll vote for 1 but more to avoid 2 which is only marginally better than current travesty and 3 because I'm slightly more traditional than I thought in terms of shield shape if we're going that route.
bluejock
Boss coat aficionado
The apparent need to have EVERTON so that 12 year old kids in a sweatshop in Vietnam will know which team's kit they're sewing on that particular day, makes the whole exercise a bit of a farce.
How much have we paid this Kenyon Fraser bunch to come up with this absolute muck?
How much have we paid this Kenyon Fraser bunch to come up with this absolute muck?
TheFinnFan
Finners
First impression...1 or 2
Go back to the old design and remove Everton and 1878 for the sake of the kits and keep them there for official use. This seems to be the problem with Nike liking a complete template.
Christiffa25
Player Valuation: £35m
Number 1
Don't understand the moaning tbh.
Don't understand the moaning tbh.
TheFinnFan
Finners
first is nicely retro
second is better version of the current one
third is not opening to me
second is better version of the current one
third is not opening to me
- Status
