Lets go back to Eastern Suburbs

[RoosTah]

Just re-designing the logo is not the only associated cost with rebranding. It also applies to things like stationery, signage, the player's gear and associated things as well. Whilst I don't know how much it would cost, having seen it when Government Departments change their names for political reasons (I am a public servant so I do have some knowledge on this) it is not as small a measure as people seem to think.

As to retro stuff, I know plenty of people who are roosters fans and think it looks crap and don't buy it. As such I would rather see some hard data before accepting your assertions on that matter thanks (and no, I don't expect you to have it ). Also just because people buy or were given retro gear (e.g. Member's hoodies were given out as part of membership packages this year) does not necessarily mean they all want the name changed.

It's interesting that you talk an awful lot about needing a logical reason to change, yet to date you haven't ever produced a single point to support the change to "Sydney Roosters" in the first place. You also don't argue with the point that almost everyone here has raised that no one ever stopped calling the team "Easts" and have never referred to them as simply "Sydney".

That's a little irrational if you ask me - you want a rational reason for changing the name back, but you can't provide one for why the name was changed in the first place. We all know why they did it, but we also all know that half the other clubs did it to, but abandoned it when they realised it was a pointless exercise.

I also don't expect that you actually know anyone that has told you the retro gear looks crap and that you're just trying give an anecdotal bit of evidence because you're the only person on this thread that seems to think calling the team "Sydney" ever made an ounce of sense. It's also worth noting that the NRL license belongs to the Eastern Suburbs District Rugby League Football Club trading as Sydney Roosters... so it's not that big a deal.

As for costs, signage, players gear and all that gets renewed every single year, so that's not an issue. As for pens and stationary... well if we can't afford that we're in deep shit.

 

[saint.nick]

All those applications to things like signage and stationery lol can be done gradually over time, it doesn't need to be immediately done after a name change. For example, when Greater Union changed to Event, it still took them a while before all of their cinemas were re-branded. You seem very defeatist to me Captain: you've yet to provide a single argument that supports the initial name change, yet you suggest that everyone just put up with it anyway because that's life isn't it...

 

[Captain Apollo]

It's interesting that you talk an awful lot about needing a logical reason to change, yet to date you haven't ever produced a single point to support the change to "Sydney Roosters" in the first place. You also don't argue with the point that almost everyone here has raised that no one ever stopped calling the team "Easts" and have never referred to them as simply "Sydney".

Mate, why do I have to state any reason for why the name changed? It happened, it is how things exist now.

If you want change, it is up to the proponent to articulate a case for change not vice a versa. That is not how things work in life.

All those applications to things like signage and stationery lol can be done gradually over time, it doesn't need to be immediately done after a name change. For example, when Greater Union changed to Event, it still took them a while before all of their cinemas were re-branded. You seem very defeatist to me Captain: you've yet to provide a single argument that supports the initial name change, yet you suggest that everyone just put up with it anyway because that's life isn't it...

Changing the name of the club is not high on my list of priorities. It appears to be on yours. As such I am under no obligation at all to defend something I had nothing to do with. Also defeatist? Lol. I have to defend something which happened 20 years ago? Get real. ROFLMAO.

You and RoosTah want the change, it is up to you to persuade people as to why to change it. If you cannot persuade me who doesn't care much of a toss either way, how do you persuade those who can make the decision? Do you seriously think you will persuade the powers that be with your argument? I don't, which is why I am stating what I have. If you can't see that, then that is your problem, not mine.

 

[RoosTah]

Mate, why do I have to state any reason for why the name changed? It happened, it is how things exist now.

If you want change, it is up to the proponent to articulate a case for change not vice a versa. That is not how things work in life.

It's pretty simple - you're arguing against the change on the basis that there's no logical reason for it, but can't explain why it should have been changed in the first place. That makes your argument inherently contradictory.

All you're really offering is: "it sounds too hard and I don't see the point so f**k it".

As for "how things work in life", the original name change was an experiment that failed, and the fact that it's never been accepted proves it. And, generally speaking, "in life" when an experiment fails we don't continue with it. The only thing the experiment proved is that changing your name can make you the butt of numerous jokes from your rivals - South Sydney to name one.

Again, I know you're probably not a Roosters fan so you don't quite get it, but there's a reason all the fans call the team "Easts".

 

[Captain Apollo]

It's pretty simple - you're arguing against the change on the basis that there's no logical reason for it, but can't explain why it should have been changed in the first place. That makes your argument inherently contradictory.

All you're really offering is: "it sounds too hard and I don't see the point so f**k it".

As for "how things work in life", the original name change was an experiment that failed, and the fact that it's never been accepted proves it. And, generally speaking, "in life" when an experiment fails we don't continue with it. The only thing the experiment proved is that changing your name can make you the butt of numerous jokes from your rivals - South Sydney to name one.

Again, I know you're probably not a Roosters fan so you don't quite get it, but there's a reason all the fans call the team "Easts".

The one who doesn't get it is you my friend.

Firstly, just cause I don't get myself in a lather over the name "Easts", which in fact was not the club's name, it was Eastern Suburbs by the way, do not question my loyalty thank you. I've been following the Roosters just shy of 40 years.

Secondly, you are the one who is saying it is an experiment. Really? Said who? When? Please show me. That to me sounds like your opinion than actual fact.

Thirdly, Souths fans? Who gives a flying toss what they think! I don't.

Finally, if you want to change the name, and influence those who have the authority into doing so, you have to be able to articulate your position. You have to be able to articulate why you think the name change has failed and why changing back would be beneficial. That is how you get the powers that be to start thinking about it, not with trite answers nor question other people's commitment levels, let alone saying "cause Souths fans make fun of us".

It is your opinion, fine, no problem there at all. But if you cannot handle it when someone asks you to show why, then do not get huffy with me. Reason being people just switch off and that is my entire point which you nor saint.nick have not at any stage grasped. Have I said I cannot be persuaded? Nope. I have in fact challenged you to do so. Yet you have failed to even try beyond a few trite phrases and vague insults or profanity.

As such I see no further point in continuing this conversation.

 

[RoosTah]

As such I see no further point in continuing this conversation.

I honestly don't know why you've commented in the first place to be honest. You've never said anything other than you basically don't see the point and you're the only person on here that hasn't supported the change back - one that makes sense given the team's license is still held by The Eastern Suburbs District Rugby League Football Club. For the record, that is still the club's name by the way. The "Sydney Roosters" is just the brand name of our NRL side.

Time to move on mate. For someone who claims to be apathetic, you're certainly getting awfully upset in your poor and irrational defence of the status quo.

One last question though - you claim you've supported the club for 40 years, so did you support the change to "Sydney City"? And if so, why?

 

[strong_latte]

The one who doesn't get it is you my friend.

Firstly, just cause I don't get myself in a lather over the name "Easts", which in fact was not the club's name, it was Eastern Suburbs by the way, do not question my loyalty thank you. I've been following the Roosters just shy of 40 years.

Secondly, you are the one who is saying it is an experiment. Really? Said who? When? Please show me. That to me sounds like your opinion than actual fact.

Thirdly, Souths fans? Who gives a flying toss what they think!

It is your opinion, fine, no problem there at all. But if you cannot handle it when someone asks you to show why, then do not get huffy with me. Reason being people just switch off and that is my entire point which you nor saint.nick have not at any stage grasped. Have I said I cannot be persuaded? Nope.

It's pretty obvious the name change was done because the club thought they'd be able to broaden our support. Otherwise why would you? So in that sense it was something of a marketing "experiment", and I think most reasonable people would accept it hasn't worked given the lack of recognition for the 'Sydney name'.

The case for changing it back is more about righting a wrong in my view. Sure it may mean the club has to buy a new set of pens, but people respect history and honesty and I reckon it'd play well with the fans and any costs would be recouped pretty quick with merchandise.

At the end of the day though, RoosTah is right, the CLUB is still Eastern Suburbs, it's just the NRL licensed entity the team plays under that needs a name change.

But Apollo, if you don't particularly care for the change, then that's entirely up to you mate. Still, there's no need to talk down to people by telling them how "life works"... The name changed once, so I don't see why you think it's so improbable it could change again.

 

[Captain Apollo]

But Apollo, if you don't particularly care for the change, then that's entirely up to you mate. Still, there's no need to talk down to people by telling them how "life works"... The name changed once, so I don't see why you think it's so improbable it could change again.

Mate opinions are like noses, everyone has one. Talking down to people? Hmm, if that is how you read it ok I'll cop that but it certainly wasn't my intention.

That said I didn't swear at people nor question their commitment like others did to me either.

Time to move on mate. For someone who claims to be apathetic, you're certainly getting awfully upset in your poor and irrational defence of the status quo.

Upset? Moi?! ROFLMAO :lol: As to defence, did I defend it or did I challenge you as to why it should change back. They are not the same thing, which is where you are missing the point lad.

 

[RoosTah]

Upset? Moi?! ROFLMAO :lol: As to defence, did I defend it or did I challenge you as to why it should change back. They are not the same thing, which is where you are missing the point lad.

To be fair, you haven't really been arguing for the 'Sydney' title. I suppose it's more your argument that "that's the way it is and ain't nottin' gonna change it'" attitude that makes you seem like the defender.

It also doesn't help that you seem to dodge questions on what your position was in on the original change...

All the same, I do think I've I and others have provided a fair case as to why we want it changed back. Perhaps you think it's purely a sentimental thing, and I think what Strong_latte says - that it's at least to some degree about "righting a wrong" is a fair point.

 

[strong_latte]

Mate opinions are like noses, everyone has one. Talking down to people? Hmm, if that is how you read it ok I'll cop that but it certainly wasn't my intention.

It's a little sanctimonious, and I also think a bit of a non sequitur... You're main argument seems to be claiming that "things are the way they are so don't expect change without a good cause", but seem to ignore the fact that 20 years ago they did just that.

Now, clearly someone back then had the bright idea that people just wouldn't continue to adhere to the club's then almost 90 years of history and just pretend the name change was all good and well. To me that doesn't sound like it could have made much sense then or now, but the change happened all the same and people have been calling for a reversion pretty well since it happened.

With that in mind, I really don't think it's too far fetched a notion that the club could change back.

 

[saint.nick]

Yes Apollo, thank you for identifying that there is a difference between 'Easts' and 'Eastern Suburbs'. But that's completely not the point.

Your club was 'Eastern Suburbs' for about 80 years, so who would have thought the name would suddenly change after all those years? People would have had your exact same logic 20 years ago (although for right reasons), yet look what happened.

If the name change wasn't an experiment, then what was it then? Not everything in life needs to be backed up by factual evidence. It's called common sense.

At the end of the day, the fans are the biggest stakeholders in the club. It seems that a large majority of fans on here support a name change. And I'd be willing to bet that the fans on here are a good sample to use for all Roosters fans. Why do they want a name change? Because they want to identify with the club more. They picked a team called 'Eastern Suburbs', not Sydney. The fans hold a lot more attachment to 'Easts' than Sydney. This is like, for example, Germany changing their name to 'Europe'. Would Germans relate with that? Kind of, but not really.

 

[alien]

the chooks are fighting amongst themselves. i think they are feeling a little stressed about friday night's game...

 

[Rabbits20]

the chooks are fighting amongst themselves. i think they are feeling a little stressed about friday night's game...

Funny isn't it

They are a bit rattled. Just like their players who are playing stupid mind games.

Just like Manly's mind games when Souths played them a couple of weeks ago.

Maloney and his dark places garbage. Geez it's funny. Bring it on Maloney!

 

[Rabbits20]

Whingey Maloney! When he plays bad his attitude spirals downhill.

Hence why he contributed to us losing origin.

 

[Captain Apollo]

It's a little sanctimonious, and I also think a bit of a non sequitur... You're main argument seems to be claiming that "things are the way they are so don't expect change without a good cause", but seem to ignore the fact that 20 years ago they did just that.

Now, clearly someone back then had the bright idea that people just wouldn't continue to adhere to the club's then almost 90 years of history and just pretend the name change was all good and well. To me that doesn't sound like it could have made much sense then or now, but the change happened all the same and people have been calling for a reversion pretty well since it happened.

With that in mind, I really don't think it's too far fetched a notion that the club could change back.

Yes it could change back. I'm not disputing that.

I have harped on about it to get to the nub of the issue which is, if it is so easy and is "righting a wrong" as it has been put by some, then why hasn't it? That is the million dollar question none of us seem to be able to answer. Hence by asking the questions I have that is what I've been seeing if we can find out. As such there is something that we don't know about it would seem.

 

[saint.nick]

Why hasn't it been changed back? Simple: Roosters management don't agree that this is 'righting a wrong'; Roosters fans on here argue that it is in fact righting a wrong. That is plainly obvious. Please pay by cheque.

 

[strong_latte]

Yes it could change back. I'm not disputing that.

I have harped on about it to get to the nub of the issue which is, if it is so easy and is "righting a wrong" as it has been put by some, then why hasn't it? That is the million dollar question none of us seem to be able to answer. Hence by asking the questions I have that is what I've been seeing if we can find out. As such there is something that we don't know about it would seem.

Well, it's not a "million dollar question", and even if it was that's not much of an issue for the ESDRLFC given they've just proposed a $100 million club HQ development to Waverley council. So they're not short a buck...

Ironically Apollo, in a funny sort of way you and the rest of us on here are bewildered for the same reasons, just from different angles. You're bewildered as to what the justifications for changing it back could be, whilst myself and everyone else here are bewildered at how the club's administration ever came to the decision to trade our name in for a more generic geographic marker 20 years ago.

Also similarly, you don't understand what a change back will achieve, whilst we feel no one can explain what the name change has ever achieved for our club, other than to cheapen our team's reputation and image amongst our existing fans and our competitors.

 

[saint.nick]

Yep, it's well and good to ask what the name change to Easts would achieve, but your argument falls short when you can't even explain what the change to 'Sydney' achieved in the first place...Sydney is not the Roosters really are, it's Eastern Sydney, and I just see no point in continuing to call yourself Sydney if everybody else, including you own fans, refuse to. From a financial view point, if neither name reaps any added success for the club, then you have to look it at from an identity view point. Which name represents the club better? Which name relates with the fans better?

From an outside-in perspective, it does cheapen the image of the club; it looks a prioritization of $$ over identity. Whether the name change actually brought more $$ is debatable. It also IMO comes across as pretty arrogant to claim you now represent all of Sydney when there's already teams in Sydney which represent each area. Did the Roosters attempt to actually identify with Western Sydney? Southern Sydney? Northern Sydney? I don't think so, otherwise the change to 'Sydney Roosters' would at least have more legitimate purpose, arrogant or not. From an outsider perspective, I think people would respect the club more if they called themselves Eastern Suburbs once again, or even just East Sydney.

 

[Captain Apollo]

Yep, it's well and good to ask what the name change to Easts would achieve, but your argument falls short when you can't even explain what the change to 'Sydney' achieved in the first place...

If you want to persuade management to change their mind, asking them to justify a decision made 20 years ago, that a number of them may not have been involved in, is not the way to do it. Reason being the answer may well be "it wasn't our decision and we don't see why it needs changing" for all I know. If they were, do you honestly think doing it that way will see them come out and go "yes it was a mistake"? One thing people in positions of power and authority the world over usually have a problem with is saying "yes, I/we made a mistake" - they view it as losing face.

As our management seem to look at the bottom line on most matters, that is why I am saying you need to be able to articulate why changing back would be beneficial. If you get management thinking along those lines then it is more likely to occur in my book. Otherwise people can say all the want about how they feel and what have you but it won't influence those who you want to influence now will it? That is what you are not understanding nick, hence have you thought that is why I might be pushing on the matter like I am?

 

[saint.nick]

I'm not necessarily one to ask about how to present the argument to Roosters management themselves because I'm not a Roosters fan.

Look, Apollo, I don't think that anybody on here is arguing for a name change out of the sake of more $$ for the club, and that's what you want everybody to do so you can see your own version of a legitimate argument. Challenging us to create an argument worthy of being put forward to management implies an argument with statistical data that shows the financial benefits of reverting back to an original name. This is a rather sentimental topic that you can't really make financial sense of from the top of your head. But yet, it's something which still quite important to Roosters fans. It's not like Roosters fans are asking for some kind of business overhaul, they just want a new name. And not any old new name, but a name which every NRL stakeholder is actually very familiar with. Recent history shows that NRL clubs will be willing to consider those sentiments; The Bulldogs went back to Canterbury-Bankstown and changed their crest to a more traditional style, while Parramatta also brought back their original crest.

What can Roosters fans do? I don't know, fan power? Make a petition? I'm sure it'd get many signatures because I don't see it as a very polarising topic; I'm confident most people would support the name change because they realise the identity benefits it brings along.

In conclusion, I think the argument that your own fans are not able to fully identify with your brand is a pretty strong argument.