Melbourne, One Heart Too Many?

Melbourne Heart FC is a soccer team that will begin competing in the A-League during the upcoming 2010/11 season, and, until recently, lacked a concrete name and identity. Soccer has a strange place within Australian sporting culture. In spite of the relative success of our national team at the last World Cup, and the increase in popularity with the introduction of the A-League in 2004, the world game has always been the bridesmaid to the brides of the other (more successful) Australian football codes. Melbourne, in particular, is a hard place for new team to succeed — with 9 out of 16 AFL teams, and highly successfully rugby and soccer teams — any new sports franchise that enters into such a saturated market has to hit the ground running.

With that in mind, the Melbourne Heart identity does a lot right. And a few things… less right. While we are often (rightly) quick to dismiss crowd sourcing as a blight upon the design industry, I think that when it comes to local sports teams we can make an exception — if anything is meant to represent a grass roots community, local teams are it. Local tabloid the Herald Sun ran a competition to name the new team. From four choices — Melbourne Heart FC, Sporting Melbourne FC, Melburnians, and Melbourne Revolution — shortlisted after the competition, Heart won. However, the name has been mired in opposition by two entities: First, the Australian Football League (AFL) which claimed that the only team capable of using the words “Australian,” “Football,” and “Club” was the city’s rugby team, Melbourne Football Club. The second came from the Lord Mayor’s Charitable Foundation, which holds an annual “Heart of Melbourne Appeal” for the homeless. It remains to be seen whether this name and identity will stick around for long.

The logo itself, created by brand agency Elmwood, is bold and iconic, and offers a neat visual representation of the name. The colour is quite nice and the gradients actually work pretty well, although reproducing them on a kit could be difficult. The shield motif is appropriate, and references a long tradition of other soccer teams, while still managing to look contemporary. It seems that a large part of the design was focused around creating a rivalry with the other local club, Melbourne Victory — thus the choice of colour to imply a red vs. blue dynamic.

However, trying to integrate the shield and heart, while also avoiding heart-shaped visual clichés, has led to a slightly clunky solution — there’s none of that soccer elegance. The use of the large “M” to signify Melbourne is getting a little old, too. Surely there are better ways of representing our fine city? Additionally, the attempt to meld together “M” and “H” into a single form defined by counterspace doesn’t work — the H actually ends up being a pair of rugby goalposts. Not to mention the weird little dongle… thing. The choice of Gotham for the logotype seems very fashionable now, but I wonder, given the popularity of the typeface, how long it will remain that way.

The logo in press conference action. Way to work the red and white palette guys! Image source.

Overall, this is an identity that seeks to integrate itself firmly with the community as quickly as it can, and as far as football club identities go, this is far from the worst out there. But as an isolated piece, it doesn’t work as well as it could.

Thanks to Jo-Ryan Salazar for the tip.

Amey’s comment is:

somehow looks very Australian (Minus Gotham)

On Mar.04.2010 at 06:30 AM

josh’s comment is:

hey the guy who wrote this goes to my uni, i think..

first i liked the name and identity as it stands out, then I thought about the ‘heart’ from Captain planet.

Dont like the gradient either

On Mar.04.2010 at 06:39 AM

Larry W’s comment is:

Honestly, I think it works to a fairly decent degree.

The only that urkes me is the fact that it looks a little too much like a medical symbol, too.

Otherwise, I like it. It’s pretty different than most sports logos over the last 15 years, and it still is dynamic.

On Mar.04.2010 at 07:19 AM

Josh’s comment is:

Reminds me a heck of a lot of the Magento logo.

On Mar.04.2010 at 07:22 AM

qwertyale’s comment is:

circumcise me

On Mar.04.2010 at 07:32 AM

Harper’s comment is:

I’m not sure many Americans know this but the AFL is Aussie Rules Football which is a completely different sport from Association Football (Soccer). Americans usually describe it as a more dangerous version of rugby. Now Victorians love LOVE their Aussie Rules so it’s tough for a soccer team to come in and get any kind of traction.

I think the logo goes a long way towards distinguishing this team from all the others down in Victoria. Nice clean lines and no unnecessary oblique text.

On Mar.04.2010 at 07:32 AM

Gyula Németh’s comment is:

Well its nice indeed..
athough the idea behind the negative H isnt quite a big deal after seeing one of the classics in ports branding, the old Hartford Whalers logo.
http://www.chriscreamer.com/logo.php?id=zr6df8ffwed21t6jfehfph7gt

flip it. and you have a nice M and H.

On Mar.04.2010 at 07:42 AM

buruno’s comment is:

I always get a little dizzy staring at gestalt-esque logos.
Gotham is on its way to become 21st century’s Helvetica.

On Mar.04.2010 at 07:49 AM

ck’s comment is:

Hartford Whalers live on!

On Mar.04.2010 at 08:13 AM

Mog’s comment is:

@Josh: Sorry, but how, except for containing a large “M” in a holding shape, are the two logos at all similar? Different shapes, different colors, different fonts, different dimensionality…the Ms are formed completely differently. They’re, like, opposites. And the Magento logo doesn’t play with the negative space at all, which is like the entire point of this one. It’s just an awkward-looking M on a cube.

I’m trying to see any sort of similarity, any reason for one to remind someone “a heck of a lot” of the other, but I’m just not seeing it.

As for the Heart logo, I like it, minus the gratuitous gradient and the Gotham. It could have probably been drawn a little better, since the angles are a bit clunky, but I understand the desire to avoid appearing too feminine. All in all, an “A” concept with a “B” execution.

On Mar.04.2010 at 08:34 AM

JonSel’s comment is:

Reminds me a heck of a lot of the Magento logo.

Can we call a general Brand New moratorium on “the logo looks like X” posts? Very tiresome. I think we all know that similarities exist in the world, especially if you’re basing a design on the 26 characters of the western alphabet. We get it, they didn’t scour the universe for every potential conflict. Unless it’s another sporting team or blatant plagiarism, it doesn’t matter and adds little to the critique.

On Mar.04.2010 at 08:42 AM

Michael’s comment is:

First glance, knew it was Melbourne because of the angular M (good thing I guess). Didn’t notice the H right away; but it was a good find nonetheless (once I read some comments). Read the comment about the “dongle … thing” which I think is the mark’s most troubling attribute. Yikes. Now all I see is the stylized representation of the lower half of a guy squatting and dropping one.

On Mar.04.2010 at 08:43 AM

Pale Face’s comment is:

Anyone get the Hartford Whalers feel with the “H”?

On Mar.04.2010 at 09:01 AM

Jon’s comment is:

Making a nod to a heart shape and still feeling tough is pretty impressive in my book. I’m also a sucker for logos playing with negative space. Gotham is a pretty uninspired font choice but it works well enough. All in all its a winner.

On Mar.04.2010 at 09:10 AM

jonathan’s comment is:

Does this logo convey any kind of “soccer” feeling for anyone else? How about a sporty feeling even? Because it really doesn’t to me. At first glance, I immediately thought healthcare, then I read the briefing.

The counter H idea is kinda cool, but that little booger at the bottom of the M really bothers me too, as well as the gradient. And, its official, I’m tired of Gotham.

On Mar.04.2010 at 09:33 AM

Nate’s comment is:

@JonSel

Hear hear!

On Mar.04.2010 at 09:45 AM

Penn’s comment is:

Gradients suck. In this case they just make the bottom dongle look dirty. Also, what’s with the 3 - 4 different reds between the mark and the logotype?

On Mar.04.2010 at 09:47 AM

Brandon’s comment is:

I didn’t even notice the H in there until after I read it above. I was trying to figure out what the bottom piece of the M (or the completion of the heart), the lone white piece at the bottom, was supposed to represent. Since I didn’t see the H, this little white piece looked as though it was supposed to represent something by itself, and it’s really confusing.

On Mar.04.2010 at 10:07 AM

Chris’s comment is:

I’m with Jonathon on this. I’m a sucker for positive/negative play and chunky graphics — and who doesn’t love the HFJ masterpiece that is Gotham, but the odd dongle-deal at the bottom seems a little unresolved. But overall I still like it, but what does “liking it” have to do with the strength of a trademark? Is it successful? Ask a football fan, not me.

On Mar.04.2010 at 10:22 AM

Jason Laughlin’s comment is:

Considering the direction most new sports branding goes this is a triumph. Cool badge, cool playful gestalt logo. It effectively walks the tightrope between the possibly sappy Heart solutions and being tough. Appropriate in most every way. Though I too am a little baffled by the five versions of red in the logo and type.

On Mar.04.2010 at 10:24 AM

Danielle’s comment is:

The M + that little…dongle thing…up close I thought it was one of those Transformer faces.

Transformers! More than meets the eye!

On Mar.04.2010 at 10:27 AM

Martin Boath’s comment is:

Love it. The use of negative space is great (the claim that is looks like rugby posts is ridiculous) and the overall shape manages to be a heart and a shield without looking contrived. No ‘soccer’ balls, no swooshes, no eagles and no Arsenal shield rip-offs that the A-League is littered with. Basically every football badge cliché there is.

It’s clever, bold but also restrained.

It will look great on merchandise, as well as the kit itself, and will translate well in both print and digital mediums.

Gotham is getting a bit of stick but it’s a classic grotesk face – timeless essentially.

Brand New is quite guilty of putting up brands for a shoeing from the gallery and most are deserving. This review, however, is miles off the mark. What, exactly, is ‘that soccer elegance’? And to suggest that using the initial ‘M’ is overdone is madness really. Is this a suggestion that using all initials is now old hat? Or is it because the City of Melbourne identity used it? And if so, why on earth are the two being compared?

A great job by Elmwood.

On Mar.04.2010 at 11:09 AM

twoeightnine’s comment is:

I’m a little confused.

The use of the large “M” to signify Melbourne is getting a little old, too. Surely there are better ways of representing our fine city?

And that’s linked to an M representing your fine city.

the H actually ends up being a pair of rugby goalposts.

I’m pretty sure that’s going to happen with any H since rugby goalposts are nothing but a giant H. It’s finding fault in something that isn’t a fault.

On Mar.04.2010 at 11:30 AM

Ryan K’s comment is:

It looks like it belongs in a video game, which may be in part due to the gradient. And the container is quite awkward, a stretched heart shape doesn’t really work in my opinion. I totally missed the “H” until I read it in the post, and even on second (or third) glance I still don’t see it unless I look for it again.

All in all, it could be better. But it could also be way worse.

On Mar.04.2010 at 11:32 AM

steve’s comment is:

turn up the brass bonanza!

On Mar.04.2010 at 11:34 AM

Mongoose’s comment is:

I’m totally digging it. The M/H play does somewhat echo the Hartford Whalers W/H as many have mentioned, but with the sharp angles and the echo of goalpoasts, and the bounding shape having both shield and heart motifs, they’ve managed an incredibly dense and beautiful logo.

The gradiet is.. mmm. I’m not quite sure about it, but it does seem to work well with the grey mostly on the dongle. I think more work should perhaps be done witht he dongle: a chunky ‘FC’ in the space might (mmmight) give the ‘H’ boundaries and set off the ‘M’ more distinctly.

But I really do like this. Simple, bold, and managing to make a heart motif strong.

—Mongoose

On Mar.04.2010 at 12:05 PM

Erwin’s comment is:

“I thought it was one of those Transformer faces.”

Yup! Same here! ;)

On Mar.04.2010 at 12:51 PM

Warren’s comment is:

Huh. Reminiscent of the Mensa logo (if they’d decided to put a soccer ball in the logo, it would be more or less identical):

http://www.mensa.org/

I’m assuming the footballers, then, are genii. ;)

On Mar.04.2010 at 02:51 PM

Fonzie’s comment is:

Well, it didn’t take long for this site to revert to a string of inane “looks like…” comments, did it? Apparently this looks exactly like every logo that has ever used an M in field. Give it a rest.

I think this will work. Has the feel of a legacy brand that has been cleaned up. The Gotham seems like an arbitrary choice to me though. Would have been good to something a little more custom fitted to the mark.

And thank goodness “Revolution” didn’t get up.

On Mar.04.2010 at 03:36 PM

Marcelo’s comment is:

Absolutely horrible. Doesn’t these guys ever watched a soccer match? This looks like a logo for a company, not for a soccer club.

On Mar.04.2010 at 04:28 PM

Ben’s comment is:

“…was the city’s rugby team, Melbourne Football Club. “

MFC is an AFL team, not a rugby team.

On Mar.04.2010 at 04:48 PM

tobias b köhler’s comment is:

That logo reminds of Mitropa:

…. the former operator of restaurant cars and night trains on German railways. (Older and newer logo)

On Mar.04.2010 at 05:50 PM

Fonzie’s comment is:

Oh my god, another M logo! THEY MUST HAVE RIPPED IT OFF!!!

On Mar.04.2010 at 06:36 PM

adzski’s comment is:

lol @ Fonzie.

On Mar.04.2010 at 07:02 PM

Tim Gengler’s comment is:

Here are a few more logos of a similar nature, for Tiger Woods and Tracy McGrady. I actually like the design a great deal, but having it evoke so many other logos takes away a little of the enthusiasm.

I have to say I love the effect on the shirt where the logo ends up being placed and sized in the general vicinity of the person’s heart. I imagine that was an accident of style guidelines inadvertently sparking a fantastic bit of branding.

On Mar.04.2010 at 07:02 PM

MSGDS’s comment is:

I didn’t notice it at first, but I like how the “H” is molded with the “M”. The overall shape is odd, which doesn’t really work for me.

The logo doesn’t convey sport or soccer, so I’ll have to give it thumbs down.

On Mar.04.2010 at 07:45 PM

Eric’s comment is:

This mark is successful based on the factors described in the review. The overall shape references a heart while staying masculine and strong as you would want for a soccer team. The M-H integration is subtle yet well-crafted. (I don’t see a goal post because of the heavy angled uprights of the “H.”)

It may not say “soccer,” but it doesn’t have to. All it has to say is “Melbourne Heart.”

Not living in Melbourne, I can’t disagree with the comment that there are too many “M”s being used to represent the city, but for a concise mark, the decision makes perfect sense.

Big-time agreement with JonSel and Fonzie. Let’s put an end to the “looks like” game.

On Mar.04.2010 at 11:59 PM

Matt’s comment is:

You can’t say much for the readers when the name Melbourne Heart is easily clocking number one place in the votes.

I can tell all you advertising types that the grassroots football supporters nearly universally hated it when first announced. They’ve made their job selling the club twice as hard, because it’s embarrassing to admit you support a team called Heart. It’s like something out of Captain Planet FFS. All three of the other options bettered Heart easily.

Melburnians and Sporting Melbourne especially would suit their target market (long established European football supporters) down to the ground.

On Mar.05.2010 at 12:18 AM

cigee’s comment is:

?????????logo???

On Mar.05.2010 at 03:45 AM

Mr Miyagi’s comment is:

Nice mark, but lacks heart. I feel nothing when I see it.

On Mar.05.2010 at 09:33 AM

San Antonio Employment Lawyers’s comment is:

A decent update logo. Trying to figure out exactly the motivation but altogether a fine logo.

On Mar.05.2010 at 02:08 PM

bobo’s comment is:

Oddly, first thing it reminds me of is Dodge Ram.

On Mar.05.2010 at 04:00 PM

Duane’s comment is:

Mixed feelings about this one. The use of a gradient puzzles me and I don’t think it really works. It seems to have been added just for the sake of it and is a bit distracting.

On Mar.05.2010 at 11:38 PM

Logo Design Monster’s comment is:

As I am from the UK I am not so familiar with the style of logos created for the sport but I do really quite like the design. It does almost have a computer / web design logo style appearance to it though. If the gradient was removed this would probably help but I do agree that the gradient does look attractive as it is fairly subtle. Overall though I think the designers have done a good job with the logo and the design does have a very bold appearance which could work well for some really powerful branding. Thanks you for sharing this.

On Mar.07.2010 at 06:32 AM

Saurabh’s comment is:

Putting aside the name, looking at the logo alone gives the feel of a hospital more than a team. It is taking a bold move since it’s not even a traditional sports logo.

The name “Heart” as well is horrible. I doubt any normal football fan would like the name, I don’t. Also starting another A-League team in the same city as a big team in the league was probably not the best move. I’ll be impressed if they survive long.

On Mar.08.2010 at 09:23 PM

Doug’s comment is:

As a footy fan, I really like the mark a lot. It’s understated, requires a little extra ocular effort to see the H and is in a compact shape that will translate across all mediums. I think it’s very effective. The wordmark, however, is a missed opportunity. Gotham is so oversaturated (especially in the US, where lots of entities have jumped on the look of the Obama ‘08 campaign). A football club deserves a more unique wordmark.

On Mar.09.2010 at 10:08 AM

kid72’s comment is:

Logo 2.0

gradient - check
looks like an ‘app’ icon - check
rounded ‘corners’ - check

and let’s hook onto the recent city of melbourne rebrand with a nice angular ‘M’

check…

lacks depth, lacks heart and won’t stand the test of time -
look forward to the redesign in 2012

On Mar.09.2010 at 07:25 PM

Mike’s comment is:

It’s not bad, I keep seeing a medieval helmet, which is kind of cool it’s a bit chunky though.

On Mar.11.2010 at 08:25 AM

Ian’s comment is:

The Hartford Whalers (defunct NHL team) called… they want their logo back. Not very creative…

On Mar.11.2010 at 11:51 AM

enrolled agent’s comment is:

Doesn’t look like a football logo to me either. Reminds me of medical logos, with that heart and red/white color.

On Mar.13.2010 at 12:48 AM

Victorismo’s comment is:

transformhearts….

On Mar.27.2010 at 04:19 AM

kevin blackburn’s comment is:

I designed the logo as Design Director at Elmwood. The mark was designed to be different from all the other A league logos, which on the whole use very basic looking graphic treatments such as swooshes, go faster stripes and often the inclusion of a ball. We aimed to create something that was simple, memorable and adaptable.

On Apr.06.2010 at 12:57 AM

Jay’s comment is:

I think it’s definitely a unique design, but I personally just have found it to be an eye sore, find it a bit too bold, might grow on me however.

On Apr.14.2010 at 12:35 PM

Wilfred Procter’s comment is:

I wonder if Tiger Woods will standup to Ernie Els and Wayne Westwood this US Open 2010 on Pebble Beach, with all this stories about his still going around. :)

On Jun.16.2010 at 03:45 PM