My Thoughts on the World Cup Logo

If you were following along with the World Cup logo saga at all, you may have heard some of the controversy surrounding the official logo. People online were pretty angry, and very passionate about the logo choice for the biggest event in the world. Some people on Reddit went as far as saying, “It looks like it was created on PowerPoint,” or, “Embarrassing to think someone probably got paid good money for that.” Now, I’m not here to say those people are necessarily wrong. The logo is, at its core, pretty simple: two elements, one of which isn’t even a vector-based graphic but simply a photograph of the trophy. But before I become another follower of the internet’s opinion, I want to explain my own thinking behind the logo and why I still believe it works.

Let me start by saying that I actually haven’t been a fan of any of the World Cup logos since I started watching the tournament in 2010. There was always something about them that didn’t quite appeal to me enough to give me that “wow” factor. The Super Bowl, on the other hand, has done a pretty good job with its logos in my opinion. They’re often simple, yet still visually interesting. They make you feel like you’re about to watch a cool game on TV. The kind of feeling you want to get when you watch the World Cup.

Because of my pre-existing beliefs on the World Cup’s logo, when I first saw this year’s World Cup logo while watching a game, I was actually pleasantly surprised. Compared with some of the previous World Cup branding, it felt like a much more modern approach. And when you combine the logo with the incredible motion graphics and broader visual design that the team implemented throughout the tournament, the logo made sense. As time went on and more games were played I began to notice that the modern, yet simple World Cup logo was being altered in color and even design. They had intentionally made ‘26’ in such a way so that it could be easily manipulated, further expanding an already fun and bright visual identity.

I understand what people were saying about the logo. I can see why some designers and fans wanted something more distinctive or technically impressive. And honestly, could it have been better? Probably. There’s always room for improvement. But I still think the logo accomplished something important: it was a noticeable change from previous World Cup identities, and it fit within the larger visual system the team had created. The logo itself may be simple, but when you look at all the other design elements together and the intention behind it, it starts to make more sense.

Maybe the logo isn’t the most impressive piece of graphic design ever created. Maybe it doesn’t need to be. But I think judging it solely as a standalone logo misses the bigger picture.