Man_of_Steel_1982
Juniors
- Messages
- 1,186
I suspect if it is not the Bears, then the Central Coast would only accept a team with it's own new branding? They might be owned by an existing club behind the scenes (eg Bulldogs) but play with a different name, and the older team name would be kept alive in a lower division (eg VB Cup).
That is the only way I think it would work, given we butchered Central Coast support with the Northern Eagles debacle, and perhaps that is why there is talk in the article of the league upping the grant to move there from $8m to $30m?
It then becomes a financial winner for a club to move up there, for the cost of just abandoning its name. And we all know the people involved in teh game nowadays seem like they'd sell tradition at the rustle of some coins, it's only us fans that really hang onto the importance of traditional areas and team names. It has little to do with on-field considerations, running a club these days is almost purley financial enterprise for CEOs and Boards.
It wasn't that they wanted the Bears, it was more that they liked the "Central Coast" Bears concept. Surely they'd embrace any team provided they renamed themselves Central Coast and played every home game there. None of this split home grounds crap.
Any Central Coast posters, agree / disagree?