The 2013-14 effort was abysmal and threw the club's heritage, history and tradition out of the window. The consultation exercise showed how important these elements were to fans and the redesigned effort is as close to the classic version as possible with a few tweaks to meet modern design needs. 'Everton' has to be on there to broaden the club's appeal; the date similarly adds pedigree.

I imagine there is very little appetite amongst fans to open this can of worms again. I think we are very fortunate to have the badge we have now when the club (like Arsenal) could have dug its heels in over the abomination we had before. There are much more important issues for the club to focus its energies on now than re-visiting the badge.

Also: Stoke City? Stoke? Their badge is just stripes and words (and some numbers if anyone's going to be pedantic); one of the laziest efforts I've ever seen. At least their previous iterations had some Staffordshire-related imagery, namely the knot and a kiln.

However, we went through the process; retaining the old crest was not an option. But getting them to revisit the new one is, I'm afraid, a non-starter. Unless you can mobilze the dreaded force of social media and get them on your side! Call it... Crowd-Cresting!

For me, it should be a simple design, the tower and two wreaths as per the 80's. I wouldn't be bothered about the shield, and I certainly don't need to see the word Everton. I could also do without the motto, as long as we adopt a two badge approach like LIverpool and produce the busier badge on official things, and the minimalist badge for the kit only.

But, I'll be the last in the queue to protest a change of badge again.

[Okay, maybe not an exact quote...]

Didn't he go on to manage a football club or something?

"Badges? We don't need no Stinking badges"... or maybe it was Countryfile: "We don't need no stinking badgers."

My favourite badge was 1991-2000 but the current one I've got used to and like it.

Look how fast it has spiraled off into Eli Wallach and odiferous caniform roadkill.

For me it is case of classicism v's modernism. Historically the medieval crests were a rich display of intricate woven colour, with the workmanship and the colours themselves carrying messages of wealth and prestige. Coloured dyes, especially being rare and expensive, so used in small quantities with the then classical images of power, lions, dragons etc.

Fast forward the fashionable blazer and the breast pocket. Epaulletes and fancy cuffs were always more continental and militaristic, but wearing your badge on your heart and not your sleeve seemed more 'British' I suppose! The solid navy as a backcloth to the colourful, heavily detailed badge became imprinted onto our way of seeing things.

Fast forward again the you come up with the simplified designer statement badge. . . . because it was cheaper.

Fast forward again and the more intricate bade style can be making a come-back as the means of production make it readily affordable.

Graphically I think the badge should be more colourful (but without any red!) and should encapsulate the spirit of the new stadium, in a similar way that the new stadium could catch associated historical references such as Leitch's blue / white diagonals or the old lock-up tower.

We should ask Dan the Man to give us some ideas.

Nothing is sacred now. Change, change, change. It is possible to retain some history and add new elements (crests in this case) for use in other situations/contexts, as opposed to "updating" everything.

Ultimate brand identity and impact is achieved when a simple basic symbol without letters or numerals is instantly perceived, such as the Nike swoosh. Maybe one day, our club might be recognized by just a plain outline of Prince Rupert's tower, in hand with more detailed and traditional branding elsewhere. The tower is the most pertinent component and could be developed to be as potent as the Liver Bird.

I recall a number of TW contributors proposed designs of their own which were superior to the club's offerings.

Thanks for reopening this debate because in my view Everton's current badge is an embarrassment.

I don't mind the new one but I preferred a Chelsea type crest with Everton Football Club and Nil Satis Nisi Optimum around the perimiter separated by 18 78.

Nevermind!

And that Welsh one is awful too! We must be desperate if we have to stoop to discussing the crest!

The crest was always still the shield and the scroll with NSNO on it since it was designed. (If no one believes me, check the programmes from the past!)

I always liked the Bob Latchford badge myself and the retro shirt.

Link

And although iconic, the Milan badge is rubbish. Stoke too, it couldn't be more plain and boring.

As you say, you can't please everyone...

Stoke changed their badge in the 2001-02 season to the simple stripe design claiming the badge that also featured on street signs in the city was too expensive.

The Hasbro inspired badge from 2013-14 was awful but there's nowt wrong with the current design IMO. It looks iconic and Everton.

I'm not too keen on the current design, but it's preferable to that awful effort in 2013-14.

It was curious 'back then', with so much 'smoke and mirrors' going on at the club, how the issue with 'THAT' badge galvanised the wider Everton family so much that the club made a complete climb down on the subject, made grovelling apology and by way of appeasement, offered the open vote on the three options you showed.

As much as others in this thread have ridiculed your post (unfairly, excessively IMO), as you mentioned the badge – associated as it will be with the kits, the new stadium, the sponsors, marketing, etc – is an iconical representation of the club and is something that may well be revisited soon to align with the 'new image' Moshiri possibly wishes to create.

Having originally been taken aback by 'THAT' badge that provoked so much outrage, it kinda grew on me and didn't offend my eye as much as it evidently did others. Was it the best that could have been designed? No. Was it as 'clean' and distinctive as other recently re-worked badges (some of which you mention)? Again, no.

Whilst clearly unpopular, I for one understood the rationale behind what the club were striving to achieve. Unfortunately, the cack-handed way they went about it ensured it was never a 'goer'.

What resulted, as you again correctly note, was a badge 'by committee.' The three options offered were a very poor effort. And the winner, as you say, shoehorns every possible aspect into it in an attempt to appease a wide range of demands and taste.

I agree with you 100% when you say it is "nowhere near as slick, smart, appealing and stand-out as it aught to be." It is far too 'busy' to me. A real schoolboy effort.

I also agree with your suggestion that there can be a separation and distinction made between a traditional crest that appears on apparel, locations etc, whilst having a 'minimalist' badge on the playing shirts. Many clubs already do this as you again correctly mention: Manchester United, Spurs, and (anathema as it may be to some to mention it) Liverpool.

So, from this poster, Ian, well done. A good, valid post and one I agree with.

Are there more important issues? Well, yes there are... But does the team walk .the pitch looking like they represent a stylish, vibrant, forward-thinking Club? Well, no – they don't!

How come the emblem/badge that represents the club you love not be of interest or be of concern to you?

I know that results on the pitch is what it all boils down to, but marketing, merchandise sales all add to income, which in turn add to the coffers of the club and propel us forward (ha). Plus you must want gear that looks good should you buy anything.

My kids wouldn't wear anything to do with Everton when we had THAT badge, outraged that the previous one was a million, sorry, trillion times better if that makes sense?

Glad I didn't live in the era after 1938-1991, no chance of getting a tattoo then I can assure yer. Hopefully we get a redesign soon, a quality one, one that echos the direction the club is moving. The one before this one should be eradicated and showed just how much was wrong with the previous ownership in regards that Everton didn't understand/care about their fans (in that regard).

The only problem with this article is Ian said,

"The questionnaire Evertonians then completed in response to that outrageous version was pretty appalling and yielded a dismal choice of three designs, from which the current badge was eventually selected just as the best of a bad bunch."

Bad bunch? It was worse than that!

ps, The Welsh badge looks the nuts.

pps; Do they still have dragons in Wales?

I would have liked to have seen 9 gold stars in a circle to denote the number of times we've been top division champions. Living in Warwickshire, it would give my 6 year old lad something to point to when all of his Chelsea/Spurs-supporting glory hunter friends say "Everton are rubbish".

Last week he got a talking-to because he didn't want to wear his Everton shirt to after-school football. He won't be doing that again!

"Some ridiculous (imo) logic that it must show the name (to have meaning for anyone outside the UK)."

Believe me, it's not ridiculous at all. I'm from Hungary. People wouldn't have a clue what club that crest represents without the Everton sign. Here, where I live, Everton is considered as a "small club" (which is of course dumb), virtually nobody would recognize our crest, maybe even with just the "EFC" letters on it.

Also, I definitely disagree with a revamp to go along with the move. The last thing we need is a new badge to go with the new stadium. We need consistency with the present and past rather than something new.

From my opinion, the badge should be a gradual change through time, each time, minimal changes but keeping up with the epoch. The travesty badge (Kenwright/Martinez badge) was to much change, the one we have is a step backwards on what we had but not progressive.

The Billy Boy/clown travesty badge is comparable to human feces mixed with sprouts impregnating Pete North and then giving birth to said hybrid that they then realised (once born) had also had an affair with Gandis foot and RTL's porn programmes (early sky channels to the young) i.e. Big bushes, not mechanical, not vegetation I can assure you.

As for the Umbro kits, the recent ones, including the latest, are a lot better than the awful Puma shirts worn in the early 2000s. They are also better than those produced by Le Coq Sportif and Nike.

Have got a retro shirt from the 20s with that 20s badge on – love it.

The 80s ones really were dire though. Prefer the 2000-2013 job myself but just glad that abomination from 2013 never made it out permanently.

On a side note, did you know Harpo's real name was Adolf, no wonder he kept his mouth shut.

I couldn't care less about the badge.

My first Everton shirt, bought in Ethel Austin's, was royal blue with a white crew neck. No sign of a badge. My mam sewed blue stripes on white shorts, pair of socks – job done. I thought I was the bees knees in my Timpson continentals. (Stanley Matthews boots with the toe cap but the ankle bits cut off.)

I know that the club rely on selling shirts year in year out but the money they make compared to the TV is meagre.

Go back to the basics and we can claim to be standing against rip-off exploitation of the fans. (At least in that respect.)

Sell the sponsors and other logos separately maybe.

It never bothered them; if it bothers you, you've too much time on your hands. Get a life, go out and kick a ball.

A sign that our activity in the transfer market is keeping fans happy, to an extent, perhaps?

The crest had always been more or less the same since it's inception in 1938. Since the addition of the 1878 and Everton anyway. Google it!

I really wanted it like this with 18 78 either side on the circle.
Link