You are missing the point. The crests are not meant to be original, they are inspired by existing crests. So they have features like stars that come from the original crest.
They're not "in" the logo, they're just incorporated above the crest. But for the most part, yes. And when you have 55+ domestic leagues operating in some fashion for the better part of the last 115 years (collapses, breakups, and reunifications included), you're going to have a lot clubs with a lot of history they want to display. A silver or gold star to represent every however-many titles has become the common way to show said history.I guess you're telling me that a ton of soccer teams have stars in their logo?
I don't care whether they're original or derivative, they're terrible either way.
I guess you're telling me that a ton of soccer teams have stars in their logo?
The stars indicate the number of championships won. One star usually stands for 1 championship won. For the more successful teams 1 star stands for 10 championships won.
But good lard do I hate the way it's done in Europe, with the sponsor having its logo in front and the team having only a small crest somewhere on the jersey.
Not everyone in the world uses banners to commemorate championships like we do in our North American leagues. They're large, clumsy, and can only be displayed in one location at a time. All in all, they're not very practical but they're rooted in history and tradition. And I can't say for sure, but I wouldn't be surprised if we were alone in their use.
call me cwazy but nashvilles is DOPE. fresh AF. SWAG!
Montreal and Washington are really good.
Ottawa and Pittsburgh are horrible.
Rest are meh.
Oh I know. I definitely had something written out about the four major sports played in North America and elsewhere but ended up taking it out.Sounds like you aren't aware that hockey is played outside North America too. And in these leagues, banners are used to commemorate championships.
What comes to these logos: they are all awful.