The Game Future NRL Stadiums part II

[Perth Red]

One problem with Manly as a location is it is so hard to get to or from that their fans do not even turn up to semi finals that Manly are in and I just dont think the Northern Suburbs will accept it if the home ground is at Brookvale.
NSO is a way better location which compensates plenty for the fact that it is a slightly inferior stadium to Brookvale. Despite what people say it would be possible to redevelop NSO. Some of those stadiums are less than 30 years old and heritage listing a hill. Give me a break.

Thatd be the main problem, just tweaking Manlys name isnt going to suddenly endear them to the northern fans that currently refuse to follow them even though they are the only team in that region. Thats why you're better starting fresh. One new club to cover the region and bring in a new generation of Northern Sydney RL fans together under a neutral banner.

 

[The Great Dane]

Except the Bears as an entity and as a NSWRL district still exist, any investment Manly make in the area goes to benefit the Bears' partner club and stirs up old antagonistic relationships. The Bears still don't want us and the NRL hasn't offered any direction to suggest anything has changed. Those roadblocks just shouldn't exist anymore, 20 years of rot in the area is all the evidence you need.

Manly doesn't need juniors it needs fans, or rather paying customers, so why are you getting so hung up on junior development districts.

Anybody from the Bears district that is converted into a Manly fan is a win for Manly, and I don't see how them marketing themselves and engaging with the community in broader NS is a benefit to anybody other than the Sea Eagles themselves, if anything all the Sea Eagles would be doing is taking fans that potentially would have supported other clubs for themselves.

At this point using the Bears as an excuse for Manly's utter failure to even attempt to grow their footprint outside of the Norther Beaches is just that; an excuse.

Changing the name is changing the branding. The name 'Manly' is a part of the club's brand, people hated it going with the Northern Eagles and people will hate it going in favour of another generic Northern name. No Manly fan wants to see it dropped again and doing it to appease Bears fans is absolute folly, as they won't support a Sea Eagles team regardless of how generic a Northern name they adopt. Any potential future Sea Eagles fan in the area that could come from development won't be swung over a generic Northern name vs a name that features both Manly and the North Shore/Sydney. Once the old hatred dies away, future fans won't care and won't think anything about it, but Manly fans who support the club through that growth period will appreciate being able to keep Manly in the name.

You are trying to have your cake and eat it too...

The fact of the matter is that there aren't enough of those Manly fans who are going to chuck a fit if the name is changed to support the club anymore, and the majority of the rest of the NS market (i.e. people the club needs to turn into repeat customers if the club is going to grow and be competitive into the future) have shown that they won't support a "Manly team".

That leaves Manly in a precarious position where they have to make a decision, either they stick with their current Manly model and hope that they can scrape by, or they make changes to make themselves more appealing to the larger audience in NS.
If they make the changes necessary to be appealing to a larger audience they are going to piss off a lot of their old loyal fans who want things to stay the same, but if they don't make those changes, and sacrifice some of those loyal fans in the process, then they are never going to be able to make themselves appealing to the broader audience that they need to reinvigorate their business.

If you try to appeal to everybody you'll only achieve appealing to nobody, so it's not possible to have it both ways and somehow keep all the old fans happy and make the significant changes necessary to attract a large market of new ones, so they've got to choose.

BTW, nobody is suggesting that Manly should try to convert old Bears fans, nor have they, so stop straw manning.

If the Dragons haven't done a good job in Wollongong, that's on them, my point was that they didn't have to give up their identity or take on some bland generic Southern identity to adopt the Steelers' territories.

Using an example of something else that hasn't really worked out too well as a model that you could copy seems like a supremely bad idea to me lol.

Beside what we're talking about doing at Manly is a totally different situation then a merger. They really aren't all that applicable at all.

 

[reanimate]

Or you could withhold $2m of their grant and spend it on junior development on the North Shore until they comply. There should be different STRICT and enforceable KPI's in all the NRL teams licences agreements. This is where the NRL really dropped the ball with the management of the game. There should be a carrot and a stick. So far the NRL's management style has been basically all carrots.

At this point in time V'Landys has the faith and the backing of all the clubs like no other administrator in RL since Arko and Canon. He needs to be smart now and know how to use it and lead the game into a future that wasn't possible just a few months ago.

The junior development of the game is paramount we get right for so many obvious reasons. He has already publicly stated that he is looking into it. So lets wait and see what he ends up doing. I hope he has a proper and full on comprehensive vision and strategy on how to get there that actually makes sense and yields results and not just throws money at it like all the other administrations have with no real tangible markers on results. In fact we have regressed in many areas across the game.

If Manly were given the reigns of the North Shore, I'd be 100% fine with our grant being dependent on our development spending on the North Shore. The area needs proper attention and development badly, it's too important to leave to the current laissez faire approach.

Thatd be the main problem, just tweaking Manlys name isnt going to suddenly endear them to the northern fans that currently refuse to follow them even though they are the only team in that region. Thats why you're better starting fresh. One new club to cover the region and bring in a new generation of Northern Sydney RL fans together under a neutral banner.

Or you can not burn the current supporter base and use it as a base to grow from. Your idea that it will be fine with time is also true of Manly getting the reigns of the area.

There are two types of people there, the people who actually refuse to follow Manly, i.e. the old Bears fans and sympathisers, fans of other clubs etc and the people who don't mind RL and aren't currently following an NRL club and who could be potential fans if they were marketed to and had the Sea Eagles pushed to them. The name of the club isn't the big stumbling block there, it's the lack of direction in the area from the NRL and the clubs.

 

[titoelcolombiano]

That could also work, but what happens to Manly in that scenario? Manly stays boxed in the Northern Beaches? Manly gets the Beaches and the Central Coast? St George make the two island territory scenario work, Cronulla is smack bang in the middle of the Dragons’ two areas, that could also work for Manly I suppose.

The Roosters could also have that arrangement- Manly gets the Beaches and North Shore and Roosters get the Eastern Suburbs and Central Coast. If one team has to do a long drive to access their other area regardless, the Beaches and North Shore have a lot more synergy between them in terms of access.

There’s a little bit of room at the south-east end, but you’re right, it’s not going to happen due to the heritage listing.

Yes, I agree that Manly could keep the Northern Beaches and The Central Coast and slowly transition more and more games to Gosford as the place grows and becomes a viable option for a pro sports team.

 

[TheRam]

Thatd be the main problem, just tweaking Manlys name isnt going to suddenly endear them to the northern fans that currently refuse to follow them even though they are the only team in that region. Thats why you're better starting fresh. One new club to cover the region and bring in a new generation of Northern Sydney RL fans together under a neutral banner.

That would be madness and would hurl RL in that region back 30 years at least.

 

[The Great Dane]

Are there any examples of any club changing / expanding their brand or location in Australia with success? Has changing from Easts to Sydney had a massive increase in their fan base. How did the Sydney Bulldogs go? Would the Northern Eagles have been a success if the two clubs had a happier merger? Certainly did not change anything down here for Footscray when they became that Western Bulldogs. Still the second smaller Vic AFL club. NorthMelbourne tried the same in the 90s and quickly changed back.
Is a name / geographical change it really expanding the brand, or is it just diluting and eroding the brand?
Manly can be a strong club again without a name change or shift in focus. NSO? Spare me - you guys go on and on about how bad it is watching RL at an oval, and are now advocating more games at an outdated oval. PVL was right - better, smaller, suburban stadiums is the way to go. He suggested 15K - 20k. That is the sweet spot. If demand outstrips supply then you create a situation where supporters have to become members to get a ticket, then become reserved seat holders. Manly need to push for $70m - $100m for a modern 7k - 10k stand. Knock down whatever stands and amenities are outdated and make sure that it is the best 16k stadium in Australia and full every week.
RL will thrive when it stops trying to compete with the AFL on crowds. The central stadium model which has seen crowds go up 50% overnight in Melbourne, Perth and Adelaide will never work in Sydney so stop trying. If everyone hates ANZ, just stop playing there - sell it to the AFL. SFS will do the job for GFs and SOO. Push the government for modern small stadiums. Keep it local. Keep it tribal. Make it passionate. Build upon RL’s strengths. Don’t worry about the size of crowd. They are only small if you compare them to AFL which is a worldwide freak. They are fine compared to most other sports in Australia and around the world. Who care if the Swans have bigger crowds? It doesn’t mean anything. 15k - 20k stadiums that are sold out every week will help clubs’ bottom lines and improve TV ratings.
Don’t bland out the game with name changes, bigger, emptier stadiums, or more second rate ovals like NSO.

There're plenty of example of sports clubs from all over the world making brand changes to appeal to larger audiences, Newton Heath L&YR F.C./Manchester United is one of the classic examples, but there're literally dozens of other big examples.

 

[The Great Dane]

Or you can not burn the current supporter base and use it as a base to grow from. Your idea that it will be fine with time is also true of Manly getting the reigns of the area.

There are two types of people there, the people who actually refuse to follow Manly, i.e. the old Bears fans and sympathisers, fans of other clubs etc and the people who don't mind RL and aren't currently following an NRL club and who could be potential fans if they were marketed to and had the Sea Eagles pushed to them. The name of the club isn't the big stumbling block there, it's the lack of direction in the area from the NRL and the clubs.

If they were that simple to get then you'd already have them...

 

[Shire_seaeagle]

So you are an extremely passionate and involved member of your rugby league community, yet you would not be willing to follow what is effectively a rebranding of your team which is designed to make it stronger. Okay...

My comment was in reference to Perth Red saying Manly should should fold or go to Reggie's only and a new north shore team be made - that's a little more then rebranding....

Of course I would rather keep the current name but if push came to shove all the manly fans on this thread have mentioned including north shore or North Sydney etc in the moniker would be fine- just can't change sea- eagles or maroon & white. Keeping or dropping ' Manly ' is the only part that might split the current fans.

 

[T-Boon]

It would be a great time for the Sea Eagles to try to expand into the Northern Districts. They have 2 young well liked super star brothers from the area. Sydney is well over the Roosters and are keen for another super club to knock them off and to ward off the Eels threat. And rugby and AFL in Sydney are in down times. The Sea Eagles are one of the few Sydney clubs maybe the only one with a really obvious area to expand into. Very unique case.

 

[Shire_seaeagle]

There're plenty of example of sports clubs from all over the world making brand changes to appeal to larger audiences, Newton Heath L&YR F.C./Manchester United is one of the classic examples, but there're literally dozens of other big examples.

Mate your classic example you quoted occurred in the early 1900's before rugby league was even formed!
A bit more recent successful brand change might be more relevant

 

[T-Boon]

Of course I would rather keep the current name but if push came to shove all the manly fans on this thread have mentioned including north shore or North Sydney etc in the moniker would be fine- just can't change sea- eagles or maroon & white. Keeping or dropping ' Manly ' is the only part that might split the current fans.

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.

 

[Shire_seaeagle]

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.

I would too to be honest but I couldn't begrudge a fellow supporter who didn't. If the direction did come from the NRL and we got to keep our colours and sea eagles and got a new stadium somewhere in the area I doubt there would be much opposition.

 

[Perth Red]

That would be madness and would hurl RL in that region back 30 years at least.

Would it? The current Manly catchment population is less than 300k. The Region we are talking about a new club appealing to is well over 1million people. Seems to me there is a lot more to be gained than lost? If most of Manly 1st grade went across to new club and they where playing in a beaut stadium in easy reach of that million and were as successful as the top clubs over a sustained period would we really be losing anything other than a suburban mentality that is currently seeing clubs living hand to mouth and a big part of Sydney being neglected?

In regards to is it Manly transformed or a new club you'd have to do some market research on fans in the region to see if there was mass consensus that they'd never follow a manly side no matter what they call themselves. If it is too big a barrier then you will end up either waiting for a generation or two to change or you need a fresh new brand for the area.

 

[Perth Red]

Mate your classic example you quoted occurred in the early 1900's before rugby league was even formed!
A bit more recent successful brand change might be more relevant

Two local RL clubs joined up and changed branding to become Catalan Dragons to appeal to a whole region and enter top tier.

 

[reanimate]

Manly doesn't need juniors it needs fans, or rather paying customers, so why are you getting so hung up on junior development districts.

Anybody from the Bears district that is converted into a Manly fan is a win for Manly, and I don't see how them marketing themselves and engaging with the community in broader NS is a benefit to anybody other than the Sea Eagles themselves, if anything all the Sea Eagles would be doing is taking fans that potentially would have supported other clubs for themselves.

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.

At this point using the Bears as an excuse for Manly's utter failure to even attempt to grow their footprint outside of the Norther Beaches is just that; an excuse.
You are trying to have your cake and eat it too...

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.

If you try to appeal to everybody you'll only achieve appealing to nobody, so it's not possible to have it both ways and somehow keep all the old fans happy and make the significant changes necessary to attract a large market of new ones, so they've got to choose.

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.

Using an example of something else that hasn't really worked out too well as a model that you could copy seems like a supremely bad idea to me lol.

Beside what we're talking about doing at Manly is a totally different situation then a merger. They really aren't all that applicable at all.

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.

 

[T-Boon]

Northern Eagles were only around for a year and that was the worst year in RLs history. If they had of hung around it would be a way better club than Manly. It would have a great stadium and fan base from Gosford to the harbor bridge. Play some games at CC stadium, some at NSO and some at Brookvale. A huge rivalry with Newcastle etc.

Edit: just looked up on wiki to find the Northern Eagles were around for 3 years. 2000-2003. How forgettable.

 

[Shire_seaeagle]

Two local RL clubs joined up and changed branding to become Catalan Dragons to appeal to a whole region and enter top tier.

Not really comparable though! isn't Catalans the only French side in super league? You could only compare them to the warriors who by the way have had plenty of brand changes throughout the years - all as successful as the prior change.

 

[Perth Red]

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

 

[Perth Red]

Not really comparable though! isn't Catalans the only French side in super league? You could only compare them to the warriors who by the way have had plenty of brand changes throughout the years - all as successful as the prior change.

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.

 

[The Great Dane]

Mate your classic example you quoted occurred in the early 1900's before rugby league was even formed!
A bit more recent successful brand change might be more relevant

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!