What's new
The Front Row Forums

Register a free account today to become a member of the world's largest Rugby League discussion forum! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

John ribot on sterlo...

Stallion

First Grade
Messages
7,467
Just in regards to Super League 'winning', certainly a lot of the SL staff went on to get pretty well paying jobs within the NRL and/or its clubs (and still do 20 years later).

These details were taken from the 1997 Super League Draw Card...

View attachment 17151

Clearly a high jacking of the code! What staggers me is that Manly/Newcastle grandfinal had won the weight of public opinion and popularity toward the ARL competition yet the ARL could not work that out!? Pretty sure News Ltd did know this and decided to get a deal done in stealth before the ARL had worked out they were clearly winning the public approval and not superleague. A very poor calibre of administrators were in place and the ones today are clearly singing to the News Ltd tune. The game is not genuinely expanding by chance! It's deliberate. It follows the well devised and cleverly orchestrated 'destructionist /weakening' policy and a containment agenda aimed squarely and solely at rugby league by those whom want to weaken/control rugby league. The rat behind the scenes is rugby union but they are very highly educated and know how to use the system to suppress RL and are doing it through their "friends'! Btw they(RU) should know how as they have been repressing its younger and more attractive 'sibling' elsewhere for decades. The RU motivation for doing this is FEAR of rugby league becoming the dominant rugby code. Whilst the rugby league flagship (NRL)floats rugby league is perceived as a threat by rugby union and a dedicated and deliberate attack on this rugby-league stronghold is being witnessed.
 
Last edited:
Messages
14,480
I think everyone agrees on two our of three things.

1 - there needs to be less teams in Sydney.

2 - Sydney team identities can't 'die'.

3 - other regions need a team (Perth, Adelaide, NZ2, Brisbane2, Central Coast, Central Qld, etc).

The only true answer is relocation.

The other thing the NRL can do, is if they really really want this 6pm Friday night spot, is that all these games are played in regional centres.

So then Sydney teams playing Melbourne, Gold Coast, Brisbane, Nth Qld, Canberra and Auckland take their games to (and I'm sure I'm missing regional centres, so apologies):

Gold Coast / Brisbane / Nth Qld
Ipswich, Rockhampton, Cairns, Mackay, Coffs Harbour, Perth, Darwin, Alice Springs.

Storm
Geelong, Hobart, Adelaide, Perth

Warriors
Christchurch, Dunedin, Wellington, etc.

Canberra
Wagga Wagga, Orange, Albury, Mudgee, Bathurst, Griffith, Dubbo, Tamworth, Port Macquarie, Lismore etc.

Sydney Teams can also take their games Vs Newcastle to Gosford.

This way, more regions are getting NRL games.
Gosford is getting 8 games a year.
Sydney is getting less matches per year and spreading the game AND also the home-Sydney games are against their traditional 'Sydney' teams.

Ideally, Sydney teams play 3-4 games in Adelaide and Perth a season.
At first, this gives these cities a minor NRL presence, with build up to true inclusion in the NRL.
If the NRL incentivise a slowly-slowly relocation of at least 2 Sydney teams, they can eventually move a team to Adelaide and Perth full time.

A fan/member of a club still gets minimum 6-8 games at their home and takes 4-6 on the road. It's all TV anyway, so people will still watch Souths, Saints and the Dogs going around on TV. And then maybe they'll get off their arses and go to more games.

It's just an idea. Probably not a good one. But it covers the three bases everyone seems to argue over - too many Sydney teams, too many Sydney games, not enough care for regional centres and 'expansion' and 'brands' not dying.
 

Stallion

First Grade
Messages
7,467
I think everyone agrees on two our of three things.

1 - there needs to be less teams in Sydney.

2 - Sydney team identities can't 'die'.

3 - other regions need a team (Perth, Adelaide, NZ2, Brisbane2, Central Coast, Central Qld, etc).

The only true answer is relocation.

The other thing the NRL can do, is if they really really want this 6pm Friday night spot, is that all these games are played in regional centres.

So then Sydney teams playing Melbourne, Gold Coast, Brisbane, Nth Qld, Canberra and Auckland take their games to (and I'm sure I'm missing regional centres, so apologies):

Gold Coast / Brisbane / Nth Qld
Ipswich, Rockhampton, Cairns, Mackay, Coffs Harbour, Perth, Darwin, Alice Springs.

Storm
Geelong, Hobart, Adelaide, Perth

Warriors
Christchurch, Dunedin, Wellington, etc.

Canberra
Wagga Wagga, Orange, Albury, Mudgee, Bathurst, Griffith, Dubbo, Tamworth, Port Macquarie, Lismore etc.

Sydney Teams can also take their games Vs Newcastle to Gosford.

This way, more regions are getting NRL games.
Gosford is getting 8 games a year.
Sydney is getting less matches per year and spreading the game AND also the home-Sydney games are against their traditional 'Sydney' teams.

Ideally, Sydney teams play 3-4 games in Adelaide and Perth a season.
At first, this gives these cities a minor NRL presence, with build up to true inclusion in the NRL.
If the NRL incentivise a slowly-slowly relocation of at least 2 Sydney teams, they can eventually move a team to Adelaide and Perth full time.

A fan/member of a club still gets minimum 6-8 games at their home and takes 4-6 on the road. It's all TV anyway, so people will still watch Souths, Saints and the Dogs going around on TV. And then maybe they'll get off their arses and go to more games.

It's just an idea. Probably not a good one. But it covers the three bases everyone seems to argue over - too many Sydney teams, too many Sydney games, not enough care for regional centres and 'expansion' and 'brands' not dying.

Maintaining the Sydney teams in their location is vital! You will weaken the code with relocation. I do agree that defunct club identities that were merged or kicked out should have strategic relocation opportunities. For instance, the Magpies brand for perhaps WA or Sth Australia, NORTH Sydney Bears to the Central Coast, The iconic Balmain name back in the comp with possibly Balmain Campbelltown Tigers as a revitalised franchise with Wests getting their name and logo in another top flight expansion franchise. The disrupting of the Sydney clubs location would mean absolute disaster for the code in Sydney and destroy confidence in the code all over! (The jewel in the crown is Sydney) Other codes would snap up the opportunity and rugby league would be headed for certain disaster.
 
Last edited:

Perth Red

Post Whore
Messages
65,420
Even though I'm a Broncos fan I can see some potential for a second team in Brisbane. If they called the team the Diehards or Brothers they would get an appropriate level of support. The Crushers got crushed by News, SL and had to share a city with the protagonist of Super League but none of their colours or name have anything to do with Brisbane. They would also need to improve the surface of Suncorp Stadium presuming that's where they would be based. That ground's surface has always had problems and if there is NRL every week there the playing conditions will need to improve.

Forget angst about no expansion teams in Perth and Adelaide, the fact Brisbane still only has one NRL team tells you all you need to know about just how sht our games administration has been and continues to be. Its no surprise that AFL in its growth strategy quickly identified two teams in Adelaide and Perth as must do's as quickly as possible. It is insane that there is only one NRL team in Brisbane!
 

Perth Red

Post Whore
Messages
65,420
Clearly a high jacking of the code! What staggers me is that Manly/Newcastle grandfinal had won the weight of public opinion and popularity toward the ARL competition yet the ARL could not work that out!? Pretty sure News Ltd did know this and decided to get a deal done in stealth before the ARL had worked out they were clearly winning the public approval and not superleague. A very poor calibre of administrators were in place and the ones today are clearly singing to the News Ltd tune. The game is not genuinely expanding by chance! It's deliberate. It follows the well devised and cleverly orchestrated 'destructionist /weakening' policy and a containment agenda aimed squarely and solely at rugby league by those whom want to weaken/control rugby league. The rat behind the scenes is rugby union but they are very highly educated and know how to use the system to suppress RL and are doing it through their "friends'! Btw they(RU) should know how as they have been repressing its younger and more attractive 'sibling' elsewhere for decades. The RU motivation for doing this is FEAR of rugby league becoming the dominant rugby code.

Like or loath Dave Smith he has been the ONLY RL employee to stand up to News Ltd since 1995! Cost him his job but refreshing to see lol
 

Stallion

First Grade
Messages
7,467
Like or loath Dave Smith he has been the ONLY RL employee to stand up to News Ltd since 1995! Cost him his job but refreshing to see lol

Yes.Agree PR . The game is in a pickle! The bad guys have control and some of us fans know it . But what can be done? It's a real dilemna for rugby league. Their are some genuine rugby league people out there like Steve Mascord but not enough! As you alluded to earlier , it will be interesting to see what this "strategic announcement " from Todd Greenberg provides in the way of proactive growth for the competition and code. Due this month so we have been told.
 
Last edited:

King hit

Coach
Messages
13,757
Forget angst about no expansion teams in Perth and Adelaide, the fact Brisbane still only has one NRL team tells you all you need to know about just how sht our games administration has been and continues to be. Its no surprise that AFL in its growth strategy quickly identified two teams in Adelaide and Perth as must do's as quickly as possible. It is insane that there is only one NRL team in Brisbane!

Aussie Rules has always been WA and SA's biggest football code so expanding there is a no brainer so it's apples and oranges compared to League especially in Adelaides case. When I've meet people from South Australia they don't even know league exists or knew there was an NRL club in Adelaide. They were just SL manufactured shit. The Western Reds is such a dissapointment, the war killed them. Without SL they could've built on their good start.

One of the big stumbling blocks about having Brisbane 2 is that the media here is so pro Broncos and the side of the public here that are Broncos fans really strongly oppose any 2nd team in Brisbane.
 

Stallion

First Grade
Messages
7,467
Aussie Rules has always been WA and SA's biggest football code so expanding there is a no brainer so it's apples and oranges compared to League especially in Adelaides case. When I've meet people from South Australia they don't even know league exists or knew there was an NRL club in Adelaide. They were just SL manufactured shit. The Western Reds is such a dissapointment, the war killed them. Without SL they could've built on their good start.

One of the big stumbling blocks about having Brisbane 2 is that the media here is so pro Broncos and the side of the public here that are Broncos fans really strongly oppose any 2nd team in Brisbane.

Valid points. However common sense along with a consistent and determined campaign should prevail just like the re entry of South Sydney. The bad dudes (News Ltd)were in control then as well.
 

The Great Dane

First Grade
Messages
7,723
I think everyone agrees on two our of three things.

1 - there needs to be less teams in Sydney.

2 - Sydney team identities can't 'die'.

3 - other regions need a team (Perth, Adelaide, NZ2, Brisbane2, Central Coast, Central Qld, etc).

The only true answer is relocation.

The problem with relocation is that if it's forced then the relocation always fails (and IMO any relocation in the NRL would be forced under the current circumstances) and if it's not forced then the clubs almost always relocate multiple times over their existence, neither situations would be in the NRLs' interests.

There is also another answer to the problem that is a much more reasonable one in my opinion but for some reason everybody ignores as a possibility- relegation and replacement.

Build up the second tier so that it's a profitable product in it's own right and has the same amount of coverage as the NRL, then and only then start to relegate some of the excess Sydeny clubs into it, and maybe take some of the expansion clubs that you've used to help promote second tiers standing in the public conscience into the NRL. It'd take a long time to organise properly but it'd also be a long term solve, and nothing worth doing is easy.

The other thing the NRL can do, is if they really really want this 6pm Friday night spot, is that all these games are played in regional centres.

So then Sydney teams playing Melbourne, Gold Coast, Brisbane, Nth Qld, Canberra and Auckland take their games to (and I'm sure I'm missing regional centres, so apologies):

Gold Coast / Brisbane / Nth Qld
Ipswich, Rockhampton, Cairns, Mackay, Coffs Harbour, Perth, Darwin, Alice Springs.

Storm
Geelong, Hobart, Adelaide, Perth

Warriors
Christchurch, Dunedin, Wellington, etc.

Canberra
Wagga Wagga, Orange, Albury, Mudgee, Bathurst, Griffith, Dubbo, Tamworth, Port Macquarie, Lismore etc.

Sydney Teams can also take their games Vs Newcastle to Gosford.

This way, more regions are getting NRL games.
Gosford is getting 8 games a year.
Sydney is getting less matches per year and spreading the game AND also the home-Sydney games are against their traditional 'Sydney' teams.

Ideally, Sydney teams play 3-4 games in Adelaide and Perth a season.
At first, this gives these cities a minor NRL presence, with build up to true inclusion in the NRL.
If the NRL incentivise a slowly-slowly relocation of at least 2 Sydney teams, they can eventually move a team to Adelaide and Perth full time.

A fan/member of a club still gets minimum 6-8 games at their home and takes 4-6 on the road. It's all TV anyway, so people will still watch Souths, Saints and the Dogs going around on TV. And then maybe they'll get off their arses and go to more games.

It's just an idea. Probably not a good one. But it covers the three bases everyone seems to argue over - too many Sydney teams, too many Sydney games, not enough care for regional centres and 'expansion' and 'brands' not dying.

Yeah this is the wrong approach to the problem as well, it seems like a good idea on the surface of it, but when you really think about it it's completely inadequate to produce the out comes that we'd be looking for.

Put simply, even if all the NRL clubs took all their games on the road you still would be able to cover all the areas in the country that need more exposure to live RL of a high standard, it'd be a waste of energy and resources that'd only lead to pissing off portions of the fan bases of the NRL clubs in their home towns...

The answer is again the lower tiers, instituting a proper pyramid system, building up their brands, expanding them, working to get better coverage of them in the media and for the levels where it's not possible to get them better coverage in the media finding other ways of broadcasting their games (even if it's just producing them ourselves and uploading it to Youtube), etc, etc.

That way theoretically anywhere and everywhere that can support a club can have their own professional/semiprofessional club that they can watch religiously in their own leagues that have coverage similar to the NRL's, and still support a club in the NRL if they want (for example the Grafton Ghosts could be playing in the NRL 3 NSW div:2 or whatever broadcast on FTA/Pay TV/live streamed/whatever and the people of Grafton that are interested could watch that and attend the Ghosts games, and still support their NRL teams in the top tier, etc, similar to soccer in many European countries), and we aren't spreading the NRL too thin by trying to provide professional RL to the whole country with only 16-24 clubs max in a massively top heavy system.

And who knows maybe if it worked out really well we could introduce P&R some where down the line.
 
Last edited:

The Great Dane

First Grade
Messages
7,723
Aussie Rules has always been WA and SA's biggest football code so expanding there is a no brainer so it's apples and oranges compared to League especially in Adelaides case. When I've meet people from South Australia they don't even know league exists or knew there was an NRL club in Adelaide. They were just SL manufactured shit. The Western Reds is such a dissapointment, the war killed them. Without SL they could've built on their good start.

With all the extra expenses that were laid at the Reds feet they probably would have folded around 2000 without SL, it wasn't really their fault but they weren't set up to deal with the extra expenses that the ARL lay at their feet.

Adelaide on the other hand actually had a pretty good commercial set up, and were in a good spot to go pretty well, the only thing they lacked was any sort of juniors set up or way of producing their own players, even once their News backing was pulled they were still in a relatively good spot and if they weren't murdered during the peace deals they probably would have grown into a relatively healthy club, and there's a good argument to suggest that they would have been the ones combing the Queensland scene for players and would have been a good chance to sign Smith, Slater, Cronk, Inglis, etc, like the Storm ended up doing, cause that was what they were setting up to do to fill the gap that their lack of juniors left.

So who knows if the Rams hadn't been murdered we might be talking about the Rams big three or at least they may have manged to sign some of the players that the Storm ended up signing instead of the Storm signing all of them and their'd be no big three, no decade of Melbourne dominance, etc, and unless something went really wrong, they'd probably be a solid NRL club right now.

One of the big stumbling blocks about having Brisbane 2 is that the media here is so pro Broncos and the side of the public here that are Broncos fans really strongly oppose any 2nd team in Brisbane.

That's cause basically all the major RL media in this country is done by News Limited, who own the Broncos...

And I think you'd find that if a second club was introduced to Brisbane that hardcore Broncos fans are actually a minority and that if anything there're more people in greater Brisbane that either hate the Broncos or are indiferent to the Broncos then love them...
 

LeagueXIII

First Grade
Messages
5,965
The problem with relocation is that if it's forced then the relocation always fails (and IMO any relocation in the NRL would be forced under the current circumstances) and if it's not forced then the clubs almost always relocate multiple times over their existence, neither situations would be in the NRLs' interests.

There is also another answer to the problem that is a much more reasonable one in my opinion but for some reason everybody ignores as a possibility- regulation and replacement.

Build up the second tier so that it's a profitable product in it's own right and has the same amount of coverage as the NRL, then and only then start to regulate some of the excess Sydeny clubs into it, and maybe take some of the expansion clubs that you've used to help promote second tiers standing in the public conscience into the NRL. It'd take a long time to organise properly but it'd also be a long term solve, and nothing worth doing is easy.



Yeah this is the wrong approach to the problem as well, it seems like a good idea on the surface of it, but when you really think about it it's completely inadequate to produce the out comes that we'd be looking for.

Put simply, even if all the NRL clubs took all their games on the road you still would be able to cover all the areas in the country that need more exposure to live RL of a high standard, it'd be a waste of energy and resources that'd only lead to pissing off portions of the fan bases of the NRL clubs in their home towns...

The answer is again the lower tiers, instituting a proper pyramid system, building up their brands, expanding them, working to get better coverage of them in the media and for the levels where it's not possible to get them better coverage in the media finding other ways of broadcasting their games (even if it's just producing them ourselves and uploading it to Youtube), etc, etc.

That way theoretically anywhere and everywhere that can support a club can have their own professional/semiprofessional club that they can watch religiously in their own leagues that have coverage similar to the NRL's, and still support a club in the NRL if they want (for example the Grafton Ghosts could be playing in the NRL 3 NSW div:2 or whatever broadcast on FTA/Pay TV/live streamed/whatever and the people of Grafton that are interested could watch that and attend the Ghosts games, and still support their NRL teams in the top tier, etc, similar to soccer in many European countries), and we aren't spreading the NRL too thin by trying to provide professional RL to the whole country with only 16-24 clubs max in a massively top heavy system.

And who knows maybe if it worked out really well we could introduce P&R some where down the line.

I agree I think we should be aiming to 22-24 clubs but rather then P and R we have conferences like the NFL, it's the only way we can get all the teams that want to join the comp in.

22 rounds.
 

LeagueXIII

First Grade
Messages
5,965
Perth
PNG
North Qld
Melbourne
Canberra
Illawarra
NZ x 2
Gold Coast
Brisbane x 2
Newcastle
Sydney x 10 (including Norths on CCoast)

Future teams could come in from Adelaide (play them in NSW cup for moment), Pacific or Central Qld
 

LeagueXIII

First Grade
Messages
5,965
Adelaide has changed since the days of the Rams they now have two massive AFL teams chewing up all the corporate money and the expected population growth is very low. They can play second tier and we can play a game or two there to peak interest also the odd Test. It's not a high priority and doesn't give the game much in return.
 

The Great Dane

First Grade
Messages
7,723
I agree I think we should be aiming to 22-24 clubs but rather then P and R we have conferences like the NFL, it's the only way we can get all the teams that want to join the comp in.

22 rounds.

I think that the NRL should stay a basic competition of 20 teams (though the make of the teams in the NRL would be radically different to how it now looks).

All the conferences and stuff would happen in the lower tiers if I was organising it.
 

King hit

Coach
Messages
13,757
With all the extra expenses that were laid at the Reds feet they probably would have folded around 2000 without SL, it wasn't really their fault but they weren't set up to deal with the extra expenses that the ARL lay at their feet.

Adelaide on the other hand actually had a pretty good commercial set up, and were in a good spot to go pretty well, the only thing they lacked was any sort of juniors set up or way of producing their own players, even once their News backing was pulled they were still in a relatively good spot and if they weren't murdered during the peace deals they probably would have grown into a relatively healthy club, and there's a good argument to suggest that they would have been the ones combing the Queensland scene for players and would have been a good chance to sign Smith, Slater, Cronk, Inglis, etc, like the Storm ended up doing, cause that was what they were setting up to do to fill the gap that their lack of juniors left.

So who knows if the Rams hadn't been murdered we might be talking about the Rams big three or at least they may have manged to sign some of the players that the Storm ended up signing instead of the Storm signing all of them and their'd be no big three, no decade of Melbourne dominance, etc, and unless something went really wrong, they'd probably be a solid NRL club right now.



That's cause basically all the major RL media in this country is done by News Limited, who own the Broncos...

And I think you'd find that if a second club was introduced to Brisbane that hardcore Broncos fans are actually a minority and that if anything there're more people in greater Brisbane that either hate the Broncos or are indiferent to the Broncos then love them...

That's always the problem with establishing sporting franchises in Perth. They have to travel to the other side of the continent regularly which always leads to them spending more than other clubs travel wise and drains them financially. If they grab a sponsor that would pay for those expenses the chances of a successful Perth team would improve. Interesting view on Adelaide there. South Australia is very similar to Victoria regarding to sporting background and they were dumped after only 2 seasons. Just from everything I can gather they struggled to get any kind of following and even today people from South Australia i've met have no idea there even was a Rugby League team in South Australia. I've seen some Storm highlights and games from their earlier years and there were some bumper crowds in Melbourne and it looks like they gathered some support from some of the local public.

On the Broncos being hated: I'm always surrounded by people who are Broncos lovers in so many social and work circles. I imagine most of the haters are those fossils who are upset the Brisbane league had to get relegated to make the Broncos happen. It was for the good of the game as the Brisbane League was draining players down south and clubs were losing money. I can imagine it was hard for some long time fans but it was the right decision.
 

Stallion

First Grade
Messages
7,467
That's always the problem with establishing sporting franchises in Perth. They have to travel to the other side of the continent regularly which always leads to them spending more than other clubs travel wise and drains them financially. If they grab a sponsor that would pay for those expenses the chances of a successful Perth team would improve. Interesting view on Adelaide there. South Australia is very similar to Victoria regarding to sporting background and they were dumped after only 2 seasons. Just from everything I can gather they struggled to get any kind of following and even today people from South Australia i've met have no idea there even was a Rugby League team in South Australia. I've seen some Storm highlights and games from their earlier years and there were some bumper crowds in Melbourne and it looks like they gathered some support from some of the local public.

On the Broncos being hated: I'm always surrounded by people who are Broncos lovers in so many social and work circles. I imagine most of the haters are those fossils who are upset the Brisbane league had to get relegated to make the Broncos happen. It was for the good of the game as the Brisbane League was draining players down south and clubs were losing money. I can imagine it was hard for some long time fans but it was the right decision.

On the Broncos that's fine with their inclusion. It made good sense! However they are stifling the code and competition by their greedy monopolistic stance against another Brisbane team. That's the shame of their organisation to date!
 

LeagueXIII

First Grade
Messages
5,965
That's always the problem with establishing sporting franchises in Perth. They have to travel to the other side of the continent regularly which always leads to them spending more than other clubs travel wise and drains them financially. If they grab a sponsor that would pay for those expenses the chances of a successful Perth team would improve. Interesting view on Adelaide there. South Australia is very similar to Victoria regarding to sporting background and they were dumped after only 2 seasons. Just from everything I can gather they struggled to get any kind of following and even today people from South Australia i've met have no idea there even was a Rugby League team in South Australia. I've seen some Storm highlights and games from their earlier years and there were some bumper crowds in Melbourne and it looks like they gathered some support from some of the local public.

On the Broncos being hated: I'm always surrounded by people who are Broncos lovers in so many social and work circles. I imagine most of the haters are those fossils who are upset the Brisbane league had to get relegated to make the Broncos happen. It was for the good of the game as the Brisbane League was draining players down south and clubs were losing money. I can imagine it was hard for some long time fans but it was the right decision.

Storms crowds were not that big early days, they have increased with the move to a better stadium and the public have taken to them more since the salary cap rorting.

They only attracted one crowd over 20,000 to Olympic Park and that was their first match.

The clubs lowest 20 crowds were all at Olympic Park.

Storms early year average home crowds were:


2005 - 8898
2004 - 8886
2003 - 9626
2002 - 9088
2000 - 13756
1999 - 12902
1998 - 12716
 

Perth Red

Post Whore
Messages
65,420
Aussie Rules has always been WA and SA's biggest football code so expanding there is a no brainer so it's apples and oranges compared to League especially in Adelaides case. When I've meet people from South Australia they don't even know league exists or knew there was an NRL club in Adelaide. They were just SL manufactured shit. The Western Reds is such a dissapointment, the war killed them. Without SL they could've built on their good start.

One of the big stumbling blocks about having Brisbane 2 is that the media here is so pro Broncos and the side of the public here that are Broncos fans really strongly oppose any 2nd team in Brisbane.

You missed my point, like Adelaide and Perth which were no brainers for the AFL to have 2 clubs in, Brisbane is the same for the NRL. Heartland, under represented and crying out for a second club to add immense value to the game. AFL saw this 25 years ago, NRL still cant see it!

re Brisbane and the Broncos monopoly, that is exactly why there will be a section of Brisbane that will passionately get behind a new club that can take it to the Broncos. When the Dockers were tipped to be admitted everyone said it would be a disaster as Eagles were such a massive club, low and behold the Dockers have carved out a very decent section of the AFL market and have really strong supporter base. Many would say far more passionate support than the Eagles as they have spent their lives as underdogs. I can see Brisbane being the same.
 
Last edited:

Stallion

First Grade
Messages
7,467
Storms crowds were not that big early days, they have increased with the move to a better stadium and the public have taken to them more since the salary cap rorting.

They only attracted one crowd over 20,000 to Olympic Park and that was their first match.

The clubs lowest 20 crowds were all at Olympic Park.

Storms early year average home crowds were:


2005 - 8898
2004 - 8886
2003 - 9626
2002 - 9088
2000 - 13756
1999 - 12902
1998 - 12716

The Storm I assume are doing some decent development work in a non heartland sports city. The rugby league junior numbers have increased. Im aware of a rugby league club existing at the end of the Southeast Rail line. So the Storm are a positive to the code no doubt!
 
Top