Afternoon all,
I'm a US-based Fulham fan who has loved the club since the early aughts. I am curious about this board's thoughts on the current FFC crest. It's easy to understand why it was adopted in 2001 — it is sleek and modern and more graphically legible than other more detailed credits, so ostensibly better for "branding."
I am bound to support the crest, because it's Fulham's, but if I am honest I don't love it. It lacks personality, and the angled and overlapping FFC lettering imo is vaguely reminiscent of some not-great historical military graphic design.
I've always admired the figurative elements on many other EPL & EFL crests — dragons, flora, castles, hats, sheep, etc — and honestly wish ours featured similar elements relevant to Fulham's long history.
Curious whether any of you ever have similar thoughts.
As most here will know, as recently as the late 90s we had a more detailed crest, as seen at the link below.
https://www.fulhamfc.com/club/history/club-crest/
I agree with you I dont like it either, the 90's badge was lovely
the simple 1972 crest is my favorite
the history of the badge can be seen here...
https://www.friendsoffulham.com/badge.html
I'd have that back tomorrow
I.M.O.
It's cheap and It looks like someone designed it in 2 minutes on a computer, which they probably did, but you can see it from a mile off
The crest is class but not so visual from a distance plus a lot of other clubs had similar crests
The 1975 FFC badge works both ways for me but still looks like someone Drew it in 5 mins
Personally the crest is my favorite, the early 80's colored one I'm referring to on the white and black adidas shirt
(https://www.friendsoffulham.com/assets/img/1stClubBADGE.png)
The 1898 Fulham Football Club badge.
(https://www.friendsoffulham.com/assets/img/crest-1931.png)
This team badge appeared on Fulham shirts in 1931, this being a representation of Craven Cottage, this badge was used until the outbreak of the 2nd World War in 1939.
(https://www.friendsoffulham.com/assets/img/crest-1945.png)(https://www.friendsoffulham.com/assets/img/crest-1947.png)(https://www.friendsoffulham.com/assets/img/crest-1951.png)
After the War, a new crest was introduced in 1945, which was a copy of the coat of arms of the London Borough of Fulham. The earliest versions had the crest emblazoned on a red shield with the team name directly below in a stylised ribbon. After 1951 the badge was slightly amended by reducing the size, changing the red background to white and removing the legend below the shield.
(https://www.friendsoffulham.com/assets/img/crest-1972.png)
This classic design was worn until 1972, by this time the coat of arms was deemed old fashioned and was replaced by a a more up to date FFC monogram.
(https://www.friendsoffulham.com/assets/img/crest-1981.png)(https://www.friendsoffulham.com/assets/img/crest-1982.png)
The monogram was subsequently replaced in 1981 by a simplified version of the Hammersmith & Fulham coat of arms. After only one season this was replaced by a circular badge, however it was reinstated a few seasons later in 1984.
(https://www.friendsoffulham.com/assets/img/crest-1995.png)
In 1995 a new crest was introduced that was effectively a modern coloured take on the 1945 version simplified for easy mass reproduction.
(https://www.friendsoffulham.com/assets/img/crest-2001.png)
In 2001, a new shield with an angled red FFC on a black and white striped background was introduced for the first Premier League campaign.
I feel the 2001 version is shallow and without any character compared to its illustrious predecessors.
Who ever designed it must have completed it in their tea break, and were probably rewarded with a nice little earner.
Quote from: Woolly Mammoth on August 25, 2022, 12:40:39 AM
I feel the 2001 version is shallow and without any character compared to its illustrious predecessors.
Who ever designed it must have completed it in their tea break, and were probably rewarded with a nice little earner.
Strong agree.
Does anyone know the significance of the ship atop the helmet? I'd favor a return to some form of that crest, probably updating it somewhat but retaining the main elements. Maybe once we are firmly reestablished in the prem :)
Quote from: whitejc on August 25, 2022, 12:31:55 AM
(https://www.friendsoffulham.com/assets/img/crest-1972.png)
This classic design was worn until 1972, by this time the coat of arms was deemed old fashioned and was replaced by a a more up to date FFC monogram.
This is by far my favorite historical crest but I like the current one too.
Funny story, I was at a youth soccer tournament with my daughter when I saw team with a WFC crest in the exact same design as our current one. I asked a parent of that team (from Wichita, Kansas) about it and they said that the team's coach was a Fulham fan!
Quote from: FulhamKC on August 25, 2022, 03:33:07 AM
Quote from: whitejc on August 25, 2022, 12:31:55 AM
(https://www.friendsoffulham.com/assets/img/crest-1972.png)
This classic design was worn until 1972, by this time the coat of arms was deemed old fashioned and was replaced by a a more up to date FFC monogram.
This is by far my favorite historical crest but I like the current one too.
Funny story, I was at a youth soccer tournament with my daughter when I saw team with a WFC crest in the exact same design as our current one. I asked a parent of that team (from Wichita, Kansas) about it and they said that the team's coach was a Fulham fan!
My favourite too, clear and simple.
started going to Fulham with my dad in the very early 90s so the old coat of arms badges i will always love.
I've since grown to like the new badge over the years. it's actually aged very well and still looks very sleek and modern. its also been with us for the premier league years and our europa league run which has been our most successful in the clubs lifetime so the memories with this badge are fantastic
Seen a lot of teams change their badges since to be more simplified like we have so I think we were trailblazers in that regard.
I don't claim to. Be 100% correct but I believe the old crest which was that of the old Fulham Borough was made up of the crossed swords and mitre representing the Bishop of Fulham, the blue and white wavy lives representing the Thames , and the ship on top representing the Danish settlers who came up the Thames and settled in the area where Bishop's Park now is.
Something like that anyway.
Quote from: fulhamfan on August 25, 2022, 08:29:55 AM
started going to Fulham with my dad in the very early 90s so the old coat of arms badges i will always love.
I've since grown to like the new badge over the years. it's actually aged very well and still looks very sleek and modern. its also been with us for the premier league years and our europa league run which has been our most successful in the clubs lifetime so the memories with this badge are fantastic
Seen a lot of teams change their badges since to be more simplified like we have so I think we were trailblazers in that regard.
I've also grown to like the new badge for all the reasons you state. It is also easily recognised, which I also like.
We had a long debate when the present crest was introduced and a lot of us felt there was nothing to link it Fulham.
However it is straightforward, easily recognised and has been around for a while now so in my opinion is best left as is.
Quote from: FulhamKC on August 25, 2022, 03:33:07 AM
Quote from: whitejc on August 25, 2022, 12:31:55 AM
(https://www.friendsoffulham.com/assets/img/crest-1972.png)
This classic design was worn until 1972, by this time the coat of arms was deemed old fashioned and was replaced by a a more up to date FFC monogram.
This is by far my favorite historical crest but I like the current one too.
Funny story, I was at a youth soccer tournament with my daughter when I saw team with a WFC crest in the exact same design as our current one. I asked a parent of that team (from Wichita, Kansas) about it and they said that the team's coach was a Fulham fan!
mine to all time fav.
I hated the current badge when introduced, but over the years I have completely changed my mind about it. As others have said, instantly recognisable, good use of key colours, and it looks contemporary now. Stoke City got their current badge at the same time, and whilst not dissimilar its much weaker than ours.
I loved the 90s crest.
The 70s monogram is really lame IMHO, terribly dated.
They all look better than the current effort, which I agree looks cheap and without character. There were some decent efforts I saw on Twitter recently that somebody had put together - more simplistic than the elaborate previous crests but retaining some of their character, which I think worked really well.
Quote from: Fulham 442 on August 25, 2022, 09:40:43 AM
Quote from: fulhamfan on August 25, 2022, 08:29:55 AM
started going to Fulham with my dad in the very early 90s so the old coat of arms badges i will always love.
I've since grown to like the new badge over the years. it's actually aged very well and still looks very sleek and modern. its also been with us for the premier league years and our europa league run which has been our most successful in the clubs lifetime so the memories with this badge are fantastic
Seen a lot of teams change their badges since to be more simplified like we have so I think we were trailblazers in that regard.
I've also grown to like the new badge for all the reasons you state. It is also easily recognised, which I also like.
...which is the key. So many of the forerunners could be any club.
I'd love to see the 1898 badge back on our shirts.But then I'm just old school.
The 1898 badge is the one, with proper hand stitched leather balls and a cuppa tea and fag for every player before kick off
To me it's strange that the only crest to actually feature a Cottage is the 1931 badge, though, tbh, it looks like the 6 year old granddaughter of the chairman actually drew it!
Of the others, the 70's badge is what I proudly wear etched onto my left arm, closest to my heart, though the current one, 2001 shield, stands out more than most others, is easily identified as Fulham's crest, it's simple and colourful, and that's what it's all about, for both marketing and wearability. I'd be happy if this one went on for another 21 years, without doubt.
Quote from: H4usuallysitting on August 25, 2022, 11:16:45 AM
The 1898 badge is the one, with proper hand stitched leather balls and a cuppa tea and fag for every player before kick off
Not forgetting the players who smoked a pipe.
Quote from: Southcoastffc on August 25, 2022, 10:36:19 AM
Quote from: Fulham 442 on August 25, 2022, 09:40:43 AM
Quote from: fulhamfan on August 25, 2022, 08:29:55 AM
started going to Fulham with my dad in the very early 90s so the old coat of arms badges i will always love.
I've since grown to like the new badge over the years. it's actually aged very well and still looks very sleek and modern. its also been with us for the premier league years and our europa league run which has been our most successful in the clubs lifetime so the memories with this badge are fantastic
Seen a lot of teams change their badges since to be more simplified like we have so I think we were trailblazers in that regard.
I've also grown to like the new badge for all the reasons you state. It is also easily recognised, which I also like.
...which is the key. So many of the forerunners could be any club.
Any club? Why would any club use the crest of the Borough of Fulham?
I hate this 'it's instantly recognisable' stuff. Would have it been had we been in, say, the third tier rather than the Premier League?
I would love the ironwork like we had on the back of the home kits in 20/21, maybe with some wavy navy blue for the river, and a classy simple font saying "Fulham Football Club, Est. 1879".
But I like circular logos more than shield-shaped ones.
EDIT: I feel like this is 95% of the way there: https://www.footballshirtculture.com/images/stories/fulham-2020-2021-home-kit/fulham_2020_2021_home_kit_c.jpg
My failing memory tells me that back in 2001 the "new" logo was introduced because all of the previous logos had elements of the Fulham Borough Council coat of arms and that this could have led to copyright problems and possibly a claim on any advertising/marketing revenues. I didn't like the change at the time but I've got used to it. Even so, it has nothing in it that is relatable to the "cottage" or to our proximity to the river which some of the earlier ones did. If you weren't a Fulham supporter and saw the current crest out of context, I doubt it would be instantly recognisable as the logo of a football team, let alone of FFC.
I actually think "FFC" on it's own is strong and stands out (us being the only "F" in the league of course), but agree it could be a better design. A slight adjustment on the old design of "FFC " would be fine, as that looks like a historic design (and is). The good thing about switching from simple lettering to another design of simple lettering is people would not be confused by the change
Quote from: LittleErn on August 25, 2022, 04:38:31 PM
Even so, it has nothing in it that is relatable to the "cottage" or to our proximity to the river which some of the earlier ones did. If you weren't a Fulham supporter and saw the current crest out of context, I doubt it would be instantly recognisable as the logo of a football team, let alone of FFC.
Exactly this.
Not this old Chestnut again.
At least TK can't be blamed this time.
Quote from: McBrideOfFrankenstein on August 29, 2022, 02:48:30 AM
Quote from: LittleErn on August 25, 2022, 04:38:31 PM
Even so, it has nothing in it that is relatable to the "cottage" or to our proximity to the river which some of the earlier ones did. If you weren't a Fulham supporter and saw the current crest out of context, I doubt it would be instantly recognisable as the logo of a football team, let alone of FFC.
Exactly this.
Do we need to pack all our history into a badge? Surely the name being recognised is enough. A is for Arsenal. B is for Barceona .... F is for Fulham The name being recognised is enough i think from people who may glance it. We can leave all the historic stuff for the graphics people at sky sports.
I would like to see the historic stuff signified in the Fulham Badge.
Quote from: mrmicawbers on August 29, 2022, 07:24:46 AM
Not this old Chestnut again.
That's the problem -- the Chestnut isn't old. It's new, boring, and vaguely fascist. :003:
Unsurprisingly, our badge is ranked 90th of 92 here https://www.fourfourtwo.com/features/ranked-all-92-premier-league-and-football-league-club-badges
(Forest win, rightfully IMO).
Quote from: Shredhead on August 30, 2022, 07:07:30 AM
Unsurprisingly, our badge is ranked 90th of 92 here https://www.fourfourtwo.com/features/ranked-all-92-premier-league-and-football-league-club-badges
(Forest win, rightfully IMO).
Oof. That's maybe even charitable.
I'd love a design contest for a new crest. Or barring that some indication that the club is working on an update.
Quote from: Peabody on August 30, 2022, 01:50:15 PM
Quote from: Cambridge Away on August 29, 2022, 02:32:36 AM
I actually think "FFC" on it's own is strong and stands out (us being the only "F" in the league of course), but agree it could be a better design. A slight adjustment on the old design of "FFC " would be fine, as that looks like a historic design (and is). The good thing about switching from simple lettering to another design of simple lettering is people would not be confused by the change
But we are not the only F in the league anymore, Fleetwood and Forest Green Rovers, for example.
I have seen all the badges since the war and to be honest I like the present one. As others have said, it easily recognised and surely the important thing is not the badge but the player wearing it.
Quote from: Peabody on August 30, 2022, 01:56:12 PM
the important thing is not the badge but the player wearing it.
Can't argue with that Peabody.
Quote from: LittleErn on August 30, 2022, 03:09:51 PM
Quote from: Peabody on August 30, 2022, 01:56:12 PM
the important thing is not the badge but the player wearing it.
Can't argue with that Peabody.
That's of course true. And maybe a discussion best tabled for the off-season no matter how strongly I feel about it. COYW!
Side note: that FFT article about the 92 badges is excellent, thanks whoever posted it
Can I just add, I worked at NatWest when they brought out their logo and that was described as three maggots chasing round a circle but by golly, just like Fulham's, everyone recognise it
I've felt for some time that the medallions on the façade of the Johnny Haynes stand are almost ready-made to be a crest. A little change would have to be made to the proportions, and of course colors applied, but it's almost perfect.
(https://c8.alamy.com/comp/2D9MX4X/a-statue-of-footballer-johnny-hayes-outside-craven-cottage-the-home-of-fulham-football-club-in-london-photo-date-sunday-september-6-2020-photo-2D9MX4X.jpg)
Great post Peabody. The current is okay and though I think it could be improved it has to be more modern than the previous incarnations. I love typography and it was very important throughout my professional life . We changed the brand logos on many of the brands I looked after - one trick was to do it gradually and often people wouldn't really notice other than the fact that it stayed " up to date "
Quote from: Mr White on August 25, 2022, 10:53:46 AM
I'd love to see the 1898 badge back on our shirts.But then I'm just old school.
Would be great if the did a season where the kit was one of the retro badges.
Quote from: GB4FFC on August 30, 2022, 03:47:25 PM
I've felt for some time that the medallions on the façade of the Johnny Haynes stand are almost ready-made to be a crest. A little change would have to be made to the proportions, and of course colors applied, but it's almost perfect.
(https://c8.alamy.com/comp/2D9MX4X/a-statue-of-footballer-johnny-hayes-outside-craven-cottage-the-home-of-fulham-football-club-in-london-photo-date-sunday-september-6-2020-photo-2D9MX4X.jpg)
Not a bad shout
There are a lot of things that are easily recognizable that I would, nonetheless, prefer not to see.
The Khans are doing a wonderful job, making a number of improvements at FFC. Perhaps this is a good time to update the crest and reincorporate a bit of the Club's history, which is not a bad thing. Just not the Michael Jackson bit.
