Combined Brothers bid

[madunit]

It is every bit relevant.

You are trying to dismiss my argument with your condescending posts because you don't agree with me.

You were the one who said history was important to the Brothers but are now saying history is unimportant regarding Crushers.

Such hypocrisy makes your arguments weak, flimsy & completely lacking in credibility.

Furthermore, you chose to strongly criticise my opinion & laugh at semantics instead of contributing, if you don't like being called a dickhead then don't act like one.

 

[Tone83]

Not only is the gold coast a different city, people in brisbane (myself among them) hate the scummy gold coast and everything it stands for. I wouldn't support the gc if it was the only qld team, qlders barely consider it part of qld, its like a little piece of everything thats sleazy and awful about sydney and melbourne shoehorned into our beautiful unwilling state.

We're not gonna get behind the gold coast in a million years, would rather support a sydney team (just a statement of fact, not a hyperbolic exagerration).
We aren't necessarily gonna support another "brisbane" team either, not just cause, it needs some other appeal. Brothers has a special appeal to more hardcore less "mainstream" serious league fans disillusuoned with the broncos, also to league fans from ipswich and toowoomba and really any regional area.

My PI idea has fans waiting for it too, the league mad nation of png for starters. An actual png team isn't practical, but I'm sure png would quickly warm to a team that makes it clear they are "png's team" and works in the community and etc. The south pacific name and green and yellow jerseys would match their local beer too which would be very appealing and cool. But again its named such that its not.limited to just png, its also open to all of the pacific islands, and maybe more signifigantly all the countless pacific islanders living in australia. And if their home base is in brisbane or sunshine coast you'd get the locals supporting them too.

On top of these 2 brisbane could also, maybe most comfortably, support a "south brisbane" team. Brothers in ipswich, south pacific in north brisbane/sunny coast and south brisbane around sunny bank/logan. This I feel is a suggestion.in tune with what brisbane(and the world of rugby league) is screaming out for.

 

[Perth Red]

It is every bit relevant.

You are trying to dismiss my argument with your condescending posts because you don't agree with me.

You were the one who said history was important to the Brothers but are now saying history is unimportant regarding Crushers.

Such hypocrisy makes your arguments weak, flimsy & completely lacking in credibility.

Furthermore, you chose to strongly criticise my opinion & laugh at semantics instead of contributing, if you don't like being called a dickhead then don't act like one.

Lol, you do know that the crushers were one of the best supported teams in 1995 and 1996 don't you?

You do also realise the distance between Ipswich and Gold Coast is more than 90km don't you?

You do also realise that Brisbane has a population of over 2 million and only one team don't you?

 

[madunit]

Yes, initially they were quite popular, but the novelty wore off. The Crushers were also a financial basket case & went into administration.

Yes, but Brisbane and its outer suburbs spread further than Sydney or Melbourne. Half the population of Sydney spread over a bigger area...you can do the maths.

Yes, Melbourne has over 4 million. Does that mean we put two teams there?

 

[madunit]

Crushers, Cowboys & Warriors all had huge crowds in their debut season.

In their second season, Crushers average crowd figure dropped by 8000!

In their third season, Crushers average crowd figure dropped by another 6000!

In three years, their avg crowd size went from 21k to barely over 7k

Their support was novelty only.

 

[Perth Red]

Yes, initially they were quite popular, but the novelty wore off. The Crushers were also a financial basket case & went into administration.

Yes, but Brisbane and its outer suburbs spread further than Sydney or Melbourne. Half the population of Sydney spread over a bigger area...you can do the maths.

Yes, Melbourne has over 4 million. Does that mean we put two teams there?

If it was a RL mad city where that one team was drawing twice the crowds of other teams, absolutely we should. Fact is in 95 and 96 the Crushers crowds were far better than the majority of clubs. Dropped off in 97 but so did nearly everyone else's.

Financially we are talking a different era with totally different inflation circumstances due to the war. If Perth can sustain two afl teams who both draw 30,000+ and make millions in profit I see no reason why Brisbane can't do it with two RL teams or do you think afl is so much stronger than NRL?

 

[madunit]

Afl has one union team to compete with in Perth.

Brisbane has an afl & union side to compete with.

Crushers avg crowd in their second year was about 13k almost half of their first year!

 

[RedVee]

Just call them Brothers, doesn't need a geographical name unlike (IMO) all the other NRL clubs because it is a different type of bid.
I'm from NSW and I know about the Brothers clubs in Qld, and would probably take a keen interest in the Brothers bid, and the NRL club if successful.
The away jersey would have to be a Shamrock or Kelly Green butcher stripes or hoops jersey.

Good luck to the Brethren.

And no team could use a Leprechaun as a logo in these days??? Please ....
http://www.nba.com/celtics/history/Logo.html

 

[Perth Red]

Afl has one union team to compete with in Perth.

Brisbane has an afl & union side to compete with.

Crushers avg crowd in their second year was about 13k almost half of their first year!

And Brisbane is a bigger city,Perth will soon have a NRL team as well but it won't effect the dockers or eagles.

You have to put the crowds in the context of the time. Yes they went from 21k to 13k but were still the 6th best supported team out of 20. Of the expansion sides perth's crowds dropped 5000, warriors crowds dropped 6000, brisbanes crowds dropped 12,000, canberra dropped 5000. Simple fact is by 1996 the war had begun and fans had started boycotting the game. All of which has zero relevance to a brisbane2 sides sustainability and fan base 15 years later.

 

[Tone83]

Yes, initially they were quite popular, but the novelty wore off. The Crushers were also a financial basket case & went into administration.

Yes, but Brisbane and its outer suburbs spread further than Sydney or Melbourne. Half the population of Sydney spread over a bigger area...you can do the maths.

Yes, Melbourne has over 4 million. Does that mean we put two teams there?

Are you serious? If melbourne gave half a f**k about rugby league, if they were vaguely intrigued, there'd be 5 teams there. At the moment I'm inclined to question why there's even one team there, might as well have a team in india with how foreign and uninterested victorians are, but qld are nuts about rugby league. "Football" means rugby league in qld. Qld is indeed more nuts about league than nsw, the empty crowds in sydney suggest we need to dump a few sydney teams and add some teams in qld, really would just be adapting to demand. Provided a lot of thought and genuine understanding of the league culture and a feel for qld went into it.

 

[Misanthrope]

I'm fairly certain you don't want to see an alternate view to your own.

Given the dismal attendances & membership number on the gold coast indicates people in brisbane are happy with one brisbane team. The short life of the Crushers is evidence of this also.

Gold Coast has failed several times before. Its hardly a roaring success now.

There are people who call for the number of Sydney teams to be cut, yet are all for having three teams between brisbane & the gold coast.

Arthurson was right all those years ago, we need a team in inland rural nsw.

A perth team is a must. A team from png or fiji should also be considered.

Hailing from inland NSW, I'm not adverse to the idea by any stretch; but where would a rural NSW side be based? Dubbo? Tamworth? Coffs Harbour? Broken Hill?

 

[BuffaloRules]

How much we're everyone else's crowds falling by 1997?

I've had similar arguments before and even in 1997 the Crushers crowds were on par with other teams like Parramatta, despite having an absolute no name team that won a couple of games all year.

That year really was the darkest days fit the game.

 

[madunit]

Hailing from inland NSW, I'm not adverse to the idea by any stretch; but where would a rural NSW side be based? Dubbo? Tamworth? Coffs Harbour? Broken Hill?

Its a good question, i was thinking one of either Bathurst, Dubbo. Wagga or Tamworth

 

[madunit]

Are you serious? If melbourne gave half a f**k about rugby league, if they were vaguely intrigued, there'd be 5 teams there. At the moment I'm inclined to question why there's even one team there, might as well have a team in india with how foreign and uninterested victorians are, but qld are nuts about rugby league. "Football" means rugby league in qld. Qld is indeed more nuts about league than nsw, the empty crowds in sydney suggest we need to dump a few sydney teams and add some teams in qld, really would just be adapting to demand. Provided a lot of thought and genuine understanding of the league culture and a feel for qld went into it.

No. I wasn't suggesting to put more teams in Melbourne.

 

[madunit]

How much we're everyone else's crowds falling by 1997?

I've had similar arguments before and even in 1997 the Crushers crowds were on par with other teams like Parramatta, despite having an absolute no name team that won a couple of games all year.

That year really was the darkest days fit the game.

I agree.

So how can anyone suggest that a team was very well supported when every team & the game was rapidly losing support?

To me, it was a nonsense suggestion & argument.

 

[Tone83]

No. I wasn't suggesting to put more teams in Melbourne.

Didn't think you were, was asking if you're serious comparing melbourne and brisbane. Suggesting that because melbourne is bigger than brisbane and couldn't support another nrl team then therefore brisbane couldn't either. Obviously ridiculously flawed logic.

On a side note I don't get the idea of competing with afl, is anyone really umming and ahhing undecided on which sport to follow? I mean really, I get it at schools with little kids but just plonking an nrl team in a traditionally aussie rules town is a waste of time and money IMO. One team in melbourne has sort of worked because it's a big enough city with enough eccentric counter culture weirdos for some to straggle in on the weekend. That and they're extremely reliably successful, easy to support.

My honest feeling is we should forget about perth and adelaide, maybe we should consider darwin since they have no afl team and also you'd think as rugged pig hunters they should like rugby league if you give them the opportunity. Still I wouldn't think just dropping a "darwin dingoes" nrl team on them would would work, you have to ease them into it, and I think the brothers could do that by playing some games there. Thats the potential I see with the brothers they could be like rugby league missionaries spreading the gospel. The next couple of teams to join should be like that, nomads that can loosely lay claim to many towns and play their "home games" in all of them.

 

[madunit]

I was making my point that a second Brisbane team is not neccessary and is not expansion.

 

[Tone83]

I don't think one should be added to make 17 teams, I think sydney teams should be replaced with brisbane teams (remembering they're not JUST brisbane teams but rather brisbane based teams with tentacles that reach into ipswich, logan, toowoomba, sunshine coast, western qld, darwin, png, fiji, etc), I'm thinking 3 sydney teams should be axed and make room for 3 teams based in brisbane.

 

[madunit]

I think flooding a popular market isn't expansion.

NRL has a great chance to improve international rl by adopting a png or fiji team.

They can also force AFL out of once RL heartlands & fix grassroots footy by having a country rl team.

Having a second brisbane team doesn't spread the game to anywhere new or really bring many new fans to the game.

Theres a massive rl nursery on the central coast that can be tapped into. Same goes for PNG.

Fiji would be over the moon & the second country to have RL as its national sport if they had an NRL team.

I just think the bigger picture is being ignored in the pursuit of quick easy cash which in my mind is poor business.

 

[Tone83]

The South Pacific Sandcrabs would tap into fiji and png and the players could live in brisbane (or sunshine coast, either or), which is the biggest hurdle in having a png team, no one wants to live there and that won't change. But I'm sure the crabs would be keen to visit regularly and play capacity "home" games and go around to schools and hospitals and stuff like that. Thats the thing we need to think outsode the box with expansion. Not just plonk teams where they can't realistically go.