The Game Future NRL Stadiums part II

[Shire_seaeagle]

What difference does the age of an example matter, if anything it's more impressive that they pulled it off before mass media.

But since you don't like it insert any of the dozens of examples just from America alone from the last 50 or so years.

Hell in just the last ten years you had the New York Nets re-branding as the Brooklyn Nets, and the New Orleans Hornets changing their name to the New Orleans Pelicans and then the Charlotte Bobcats buying the Hornets brand from them so that Charlotte could have the brand back.

On top of that the Washington Redskins announced that they were changing their brand for political reasons only a couple of weeks ago, and I bet that I'm forgetting other examples.

Add in relocation's (which all include brand changes to some extent) and you can add in the Atlanta Thrashers relocating and reviving the Winnipeg Jets brand, the Raiders relocating to Las Vegas, the Rams going back to LA, and the San Diego Chargers moving to LA.
Of all those the Chargers relocation is the only one that's been a failure (they'll just move again, probably back to San Diego), and I'm probably still forgetting other examples on top of that!

Point taken but Aussie teams in all codes are different from the American sporting culture- totally agree over there franchuses freely move and it seems to improve the bottom line. In Oz it's much rarer for a merger or total relocation ro work and the ones that have work seem to have issue's look at the recent Tigers, Dragons merger from the 90's - still have unresolved issues and you have the Manly/ Norths that only lasted a few years.

 

[Shire_seaeagle]

Its actually very comparable to what we are talking about here in some ways. Two small brands leaving behind the past to start up a new large brand that represents a region.

If your talking about the 90's and they approached it way - hey it might have worked but it failed then. No reason to try that again.

 

[bazza]

If I was a Sea Eagles fan I would be prepared to sacrifice "Manly" for "Northern Suburbs" in exchange for super club status that would come from it. They would be almost too big.

If you don't want to follow the team because of the 'Manly' name they you probably have enough interest in rugby league to closely follow another club
The 'Manly' name/location is not a negative brand for most people on the north shore

 

[The Great Dane]

Ground up engagement is important. Manly getting into schools, RL carnivals etc grows the brand recognition and association that the Sea Eagles are the area's team from a young age, that's why the junior districts and access are important.

I'm sorry but this is just utter BS mate.

You don't need control over the Bears junior system to market yourself in "Bear territory", and even if you did have control over their district it'd make little to no difference in your ability to convert people in that region into Sea Eagles fans.

What if Manly starts pouring money into the area, despite the Bears not giving them permission to link with their clubs etc, the Bears whiteant whatever efforts Manly makes and 10 years down the track the NRL says we're bringing in the CC Bears who also cover the North Shore? It'd be money down the drain in a big way. Any big investments in the area need to be made with clear air, the murky environment and lack of direction on the area's future doesn't encourage any investment- it just leads to what you see now.

What would happen is you'd have spent ten years building a fan base that isn't going to care less whether or not the Bears exist, and if you continue to market yourself in the region you'd continue converting fans in that region whether or not the Bears exist. Adding the Bears would just be adding another competitor to the market, and no matter what you do there'll always be competitors in the market, so maybe you should stop worrying so much about what those competitors are doing (especially ones that don't really exist) and worry a little more about what you are doing, which currently is absolutely nothing.

As it is it's incredibly unlikely that the NRL will bring the Bears back at all (let alone in NS or on the CC), and if anything the sooner Manly makes an impact on the broader NS market the less likely it is that the NRL is going to be willing to risk bringing the Bears back. So really the Bears are, or rather should be, a total non-issue.

Beside, the Bears folded their CC bid to "pursue other opportunities" years ago now, so really you've just got a fear of ghosts.

You're describing exactly what was wrong with the Northern Eagles. They adopted a bland, generic Northern identity that tried to appeal to everybody, but appealed to nobody.

Firstly, the Northern Eagles was a completely different scenario to what is being discussed.

Secondly, how could anybody possibly know that the Northern Eagles (specifically the name it's self and not the whole chimera merged Sea Eagles and Bears brand) wouldn't work, it wasn't around long enough for any real change to happen.

Whatever the Dragons have done wrong has little to do with their name. Angry Steelers fans would still have been angry if the merged team had a generic Southern name. If they've done a poor job with development and engagement down there, they wouldn't have magically done a better job if they had a generic Southern name. I'm not suggesting we copy their model or whatever else they've done, I'm just pointing out that the Manly name doesn't need to go, just as the Saints name didn't need to go. You're right that it's not a merger, which is even more reason why Manly doesn't need to lose the name 'Manly' if we also cover the North Shore.

This is just a giant straw man that I really can't be bothered addressing as it's literally got nothing to do with anything.

 

[taipan]

Not sure you can really judge if the Northern eagles would have been successful or not given there short life, there 40% win record and the behaviour of the clubs involved in it. Looking at attendances its not like Manly has done much better as stand alone?

Manly attendances at brookvale last few seasons
11k,11,9k,11k
Northern Eagles avg attendance over the 3 years 11k

Northern Eagles played in a more modern all seater, two grandstand stadium ,compared to the current Brookvale Status of grass hills and old stands .Put the Gosford stadium at Brookvale ,the crowds would be far superior.

 

[The Great Dane]

Point taken but Aussie teams in all codes are different from the American sporting culture- totally agree over there franchuses freely move and it seems to improve the bottom line. In Oz it's much rarer for a merger or total relocation ro work and the ones that have work seem to have issue's look at the recent Tigers, Dragons merger from the 90's - still have unresolved issues and you have the Manly/ Norths that only lasted a few years.

The only difference between the American sporting culture and the Australian one is that the Americans and Canadians have accepted the fact that pro-sport is a business, while us backwards Aussies still hold onto ludicrously romanticised ideas of what pro-sport is.

In this regard we are the RU holding onto amateurism until the 1990s compared to the Americans being everybody else that got over the reality of sport going professional about a century earlier...

Americans don't really do mergers because they don't really work the way people want them to, and every major relocation in Australian sport has been a success to varying degrees.
In fact it could be said that a good part of the reason that Manly are in the predicament that they are in currently is because the Swans have been so successful in eating into their market.

Besides absolutely nobody was talking about relocating or merging the Sea Eagles, and what is your excuse for the Nets, Pelicans, Hornets, and [insert other similar examples here] success, why haven't all their fans taken their balls and gone home?

 

[reanimate]

I'm sorry but this is just utter BS mate.

You don't need control over the Bears junior system to market yourself in "Bear territory", and even if you did have control over their district it'd make little to no difference in your ability to convert people in that region into Sea Eagles fans.

Of course it would, being the official team for the region from the junior level up with NRL backing would go a long way. Souths are a good example, they went cap in hand years and years ago to the NSWRL and got given a bunch of Easts' junior areas- those areas are now, generally, died-in-the-wool Souths supporting areas.

What would happen is you'd have spent ten years building a fan base that isn't going to care less whether or not the Bears exist, and if you continue to market yourself in the region you'd continue converting fans in that region whether or not the Bears exist. Adding the Bears would just be adding another competitor to the market, and no matter what you do there'll always be competitors in the market, so maybe you should stop worrying so much about what those competitors are doing (especially ones that don't really exist) and worry a little more about what you are doing, which currently is absolutely nothing.

10 years isn't much time to build a huge fanbase, but it is enough time to waste an enormous amount of money. That money needs to be invested with the understanding that the rug won't be pulled out from under the organisation in the future- it doesn't take much, just an official direction and stance from the NRL on the area and its future.

The NRL can prevent any wasting of money in the area and stop the rot there by just letting everybody know what's happening.

As it is it's incredibly unlikely that the NRL will bring the Bears back at all (let alone in NS or on the CC), and if anything the sooner Manly makes an impact on the broader NS market the less likely it is that the NRL is going to be willing to risk bringing the Bears back. So really the Bears are, or rather should be, a total non-issue.

Beside, the Bears folded their CC bid to "pursue other opportunities" years ago now, so really you've just got a fear of ghosts.

So what's stopping the NRL from making it official then? That's what will make all the difference and that's what I'm advocating for. Remove the murkiness and offer clear direction and the area will sort itself out.

Firstly, the Northern Eagles was a completely different scenario to what is being discussed.

Secondly, how could anybody possibly know that the Northern Eagles (specifically the name it's self and not the whole chimera merged Sea Eagles and Bears brand) wouldn't work, it wasn't around long enough for any real change to happen.

It could have worked, bring the areas back under the Sea Eagles umbrella now and let's see what happens with time. It can't be any worse than what's happening there now.

 

[Nqcowboy]

What difference does the age of an example matter, if anything it's more impressive that they pulled it off before mass media.

But since you don't like it insert any of the dozens of examples just from America alone from the last 50 or so years.

Hell in just the last ten years you had the New York Nets re-branding as the Brooklyn Nets, and the New Orleans Hornets changing their name to the New Orleans Pelicans and then the Charlotte Bobcats buying the Hornets brand from them so that Charlotte could have the brand back.

On top of that the Washington Redskins announced that they were changing their brand for political reasons only a couple of weeks ago, and I bet that I'm forgetting other examples.

Add in relocation's (which all include brand changes to some extent) and you can add in the Atlanta Thrashers relocating and reviving the Winnipeg Jets brand, the Raiders relocating to Las Vegas, the Rams going back to LA, and the San Diego Chargers moving to LA.
Of all those the Chargers relocation is the only one that's been a failure (they'll just move again, probably back to San Diego), and I'm probably still forgetting other examples on top of that!

American sporting teams have always been a more corporate entity than Australian clubs. CEOs would just buy a franchise and bring it to their town and when it became financial liability they’d sell it off to the next chump, that’s why the raiders have been a travelling circus for the last 30 years as well as the Baltimore/Cleveland debacle of the nineties

 

[Nqcowboy]

The only difference between the American sporting culture and the Australian one is that the Americans and Canadians have accepted the fact that pro-sport is a business, while us backwards Aussies still hold onto ludicrously romanticised ideas of what pro-sport is.

In this regard we are the RU holding onto amateurism until the 1990s compared to the Americans being everybody else that got over the reality of sport going professional about a century earlier...

Besides absolutely nobody was talking about relocating or merging the Sea Eagles, and what is your excuse for the Nets, Pelicans, Hornets, and [insert other similar examples here] success, why haven't all their fans taken their balls and gone home?

There’s a hell a lot of raiders fans that said they won’t support the team after the Las Vegas move and there’s other examples, imagine the uproar if somebody bought the Yankees and moved them to la or patriots to Portland

 

[T-Boon]

Norths Sea Eagles: 4 games CC, 4 games NSO, 4 games Brookvale

 

[Marlins]

If King Emperor Lord VLandy’s does get his 3 or 4 New Suburban stadiums and Brooky is one of them, that would be an ideal time for Manly to take their home games to the CC. Take maybe 8 games there and see what the reception is like. If it proves to be successful, then maybe a slight name change (Manly Central Coast) and four home games at The CC each year, could work out.

 

[Steel Saints]

Norths Sea Eagles: 4 games CC, 4 games NSO, 4 games Brookvale

When a team starts to have three home grounds, then it's going to be very difficult for them to build a home ground advantage. Just look at the Wests Tigers, where they have had multiple home grounds over the last 20 years.

 

[T-Boon]

Manly should rename to locationfluidly

 

[T-Boon]

When a team starts to have three home grounds, then it's going to be very difficult for them to build a home ground advantage. Just look at the Wests Tigers, where they have had multiple home grounds over the last 20 years.

I agree. 2 home grounds would be plenty. NSO and BVL.

 

[Suitman]

Can we please get this stadium thread back to stadiums, and not about the above shite?

 

[Perth Red]

Northern Eagles played in a more modern all seater, two grandstand stadium ,compared to the current Brookvale Status of grass hills and old stands .Put the Gosford stadium at Brookvale ,the crowds would be far superior.

The NE attendance avg at Brookvale was a tad under 10k over the three years so barley less than Manly are pulling now, and in one recent year higher. It doesnt seem the "brand" was as on the nose as some are thinking. The biggest issue I can see with it was that it didnt really appeal to NS Bears fans as they played at Brookvale, and kept the Eagles brand. Hence why I feel a new brand playing in a neutral new venue would have much greater chance of engaging the whole region than just repeating the same mistake of the past and keeping the Eagles brand and Brookvale. Gosford would support anyone they could get I suspect.

 

[Perth Red]

Can we please get this stadium thread back to stadiums, and not about the above shite?

It kind of is as it relates to, should there be an opportunity, is it better to rebuild Brookvale, or better to take the opportunity to build a new stadium somewhere else Northern and use it to rebrand or restart the way the NRL engages with this region of Sydney.

 

[greenBV4]

Not future related but this is basically just an overall stadiums thread

just noticed the storm coloured ground numbers and thought it was a nice touch - has every team been doing this all year and I somehow didn't notice? I thought ground markings were an NRL standard

 

[T-Boon]

You can’t talk about Sydney stadiums without talking about NSO because it’s a great conversation/debate. It would be a perfect place for a stadium but there are huge obstacles like there isn’t a team to play there, but there should be.

 

[greenBV4]

You can’t talk about Sydney stadiums without talking about NSO because it’s a great conversation/debate. It would be a perfect place for a stadium but there are huge obstacles like there isn’t a team to play there, but there should be.

needs someone to take the "accidental illegal demolition" route that developers take with old pubs all the time and just pay the fine, then it can be rebuilt