Rank the Brisbane bids

[jim_57]

The circumstances that led to the Donkeys' formation no longer exist and cannot be replicated. When the Donkeys entered the NSWRL their average was only half of what it is today. It took time and success for them to become the club they are, and much of that is because for many people under 30 they are the only 'local' club they've ever known. In that context, their average of 34,000 is shit considering they have 2.5 million people to themselves.

Having 2 generic centralised clubs in an area as big as Greater Brisbane won't work. People who struggle to get to Lang Park because they live on the northern, western, southern or eastern outskirts of Greater Brisbane will have just as much trouble getting to games. Brisbane is getting more congested, especially at night time, which makes it even harder and less desirable to go to games. Instead of telling 2.5 million people of Greater Brisbane to squeeze into Milton during peak hour traffic to watch a couple of soulless franchises that just want their money, it would be better to create a few region specific clubs that are easier for people to access. Take the game to the people and the people will come to the game.

Which is all well and good if we had a room for 3 new mediocre at best clubs representing Ipswich, Logan & Moreton Bay, but we don't.

How's that theory working out in Sydney exactly?

 

[Get Rid of The Donkeys]

Brisbane can have 4 clubs in the QLD Cup. Brisbane is half the size of Sydney so 4 clubs is much the same as the 8.5 in Sydney which is definitely oversaturated. Two wrongs don't make a right here, if the NRL had a clean slate no way would Sydney have 8.5 clubs, they have a relatively clean slate in Brisbane so I strongly doubt they're willing to dig the same grave in Brisbane.

"Massive insult" by not letting 4 Brisbane clubs cannibalize each other for support? Brisbane only has one club now, let's settle down a bit. These players you speak of aren't disappearing in to thin air either. If you think Brisbane will have 4 clubs before Adelaide or Perth get one prepared to be disappointed and massively insulted.

V'Landys said there will be no expansion into fumbleball states. Zero. That means in 30 years time there will be zero teams in Adelaide and Perth. There's nothing to gain from adding teams there. The cost of developing the game in new territory is enormous and not something the ARLC can afford. Heartland area clubs will never allow it because these new clubs will be heavily reliant on juniors from Queensland, NSW and NZ, so they will block it.

8-9 teams in Sydney is not too much. Manlh could ne relocated to Gosford and St George to Wollongong, but other than rhat it is fine and an asset to the game.

Four teams in Brissie will be the best thing to happen to RL here since Origin 1980. It will create locak derbies that will captivate the entire city, provide more opportunities for local juniors to play in front of their families and gice Ch.9 a Brisbane team ro broadcast into Brissie on Thur, Fri and Sun. What you're advocating for is exactly what AwFuL want the NRL to do as it gives them a chance to carvebout a niche for themselves.

 

[The Great Dane]

Has there ever been any market research done to find out just how many people are NRL fans but dont support the Broncos, or another NRL team, in Brisbane? We seem to be making a huge assumption that there are tens of thousands of RL fans in Brisbane waiting for a new club to enter the NRL? Given Broncos arent close to selling out games and memberships arent close to say a WC Eagles, which would be a similar sized market, is there any evidence that there is a large latent fanbase in waiting?

There's been quite a bit of market research done by everybody from the NRL to the Bombers bid, only problem is that none of it is public.

 

[Get Rid of The Donkeys]

Which is all well and good if we had a room for 3 new mediocre at best clubs representing Ipswich, Logan & Moreton Bay, but we don't.

How's that theory working out in Sydney exactly?

More people attend rugby league in Sydney each weekend than in Brisbane because everyone has a team to support, so I will say it's working quite well. Don't Souffs have as many or more members than the Donkeys?

The NRL can support 20 teams. There's never going to be a team in Adelaide or Perth. Don't take my word for it. Go ask the boss, PVL. He said there will be no expansion into fumbleball states. Ch9 said they are not interested in a Perth team. Broadcasters have a big say on who gets in as they pay the dough.

NZ2 is unviable so will never happen. Where would NZ2 be based? The only metro area in NZ that has over 1 million peolpe is Auckland, and it already has a team that only draws 16,000. Not enough room for 2 teams in Auckland. Eveey other city over there is too small and RU mad. If we go by the metrics you ans PR use to deathride Brisbane, that rules out NZ2, Adelaide and Perth.

Did I mention the boss said there will be no expansion to Perth? And despite all of this you are telling me to prepare for expansion to Perth and Adelaide before Brisbane 3 and 4?

Even a media analyst spoke about Brisbane 3 being important. He didn't say anything about Perth, because it's a nothing city for the broadcasters and NRL.

 

[The Great Dane]

Which is all well and good if we had a room for 3 new mediocre at best clubs representing Ipswich, Logan & Moreton Bay, but we don't.

How's that theory working out in Sydney exactly?

Imagine if your average insular RL types ran the PL or one of the major American leagues. They'd f**k everything up by looking at Man Utd and Man City, or the Giants and the Jets and they'd say 'look how many fans they have, you could put another ten teams there'.

They never stop to think that just because can do something doesn't necessarily mean that you should do something.

 

[Get Rid of The Donkeys]

Crushers ended up with a crowd avg of 7000. Just saying lol
Diluting the Failing Qland Clubs talent even further, putting melbournes success at risk, taking corporate support away from an already struggling Titans, no guarantee of fanbase, seems like lots of downsides to another Brisbane side.

Super League hurt the heartland areas. The fumbleball cities of Perth and Adelaide were not affected by Super League. The Reds got better crowds in 1997 than 1996. Both clubs drew shit-all in their 2nd years, neither of which was in Super League.

Melbourne contribute nothing to RL and are the definiton of a parasite. They've had zero success off the field, despite having every advantage under the sun handed to them to ensure they are successfulll onfield. More people in Melbourne go watch soccer than the Storm.

 

[The Great Dane]

More people attend rugby league in Sydney each weekend than in Brisbane because eveeyone has a team to support, so I will say it's working quite well. Don't Souffs have as many or more members than the Donkeys?

Sure, but the fan base is so divided that none of the clubs (with the possible exception of Souths) are sustainable businesses.

So yeah they average a higher attendance as a total, but most of their clubs are reliant on outside funding or survive hand to mouth on deaths door, and are just one mistake or piece of bad luck away from going broke.

Just look a Balmain Leagues clubs down fall and wonder what would have happened if they weren't part of a joint venture with a rich partner, or if it had happened to another club...

Not only do I think that we don't want to replicate that situation in Brisbane, but I don't think that the NRL could afford to replicate it even if they wanted to!
The cost in propping up failing clubs alone would become exorbitant.

 

[mongoose]

Super League hurt the heartland areas. The fumbleball cities of Perth and Adelaide were not affected by Super League. The Reds got better crowds in 1997 than 1996. Both clubs drew shit-all in their 2nd years, neither of which was in Super League.

Melbourne contribute nothing to RL and are the definiton of a parasite. They've had zero success off the field, despite having every advantage under the sun handed to them to ensure they are successfulll onfield. More people i Melbourne go watch soccer than the Storm.

The Storm would add lots of value to the broadcast right, you know that thing that props up the whole game and pays all the payers high salaries? Pull Melbourne out and the broadcast money would drop significantly and your Latrell Mitchells, Tedesco's, Taumololo's etc start looking at other sports to play.

 

[mongoose]

Crushers big mistake was basing their HQ at Grange, as it was too close to Broncos Leagues at Red Hill. Their branding sucked, an old steam engine train tied to an abhorrent colour scheme. Their name South Queensland was too generic. Super League really hurt the heartland areas.

The Bombers bid is just as shit, using similar colours and basing the logo around Kingsford-Smith, who was around when steam trains were in operation. If it's history they want that will be marketable then they won't get it by putting some old bloke who died decades ago on their logo. Saddle up with one, two or three BRL clubs, build the team around its long history which can be marketed by former players, TV celebrities who grew up following them and journalists who can recount all sorts of interesting tales from back in the day. People under 30 won't be turned off by club rivalries, so it's a win win.

There was nothing wrong with the Crushers branding, Lots of people were into them before a ball was even kicked. I remember going to the Ekka in 94 and there was a Crushers showbag and it was very popular. They averaged 21k there first season at the old run down Lang Park. They were getting flogged every week. The Grange was a poor choice to have a Leagues club only a few suburbs away from Red Hill but they weren't trying to be a Grange or North Brisbane team.

 

[Perth Red]

Super League hurt the heartland areas. The fumbleball cities of Perth and Adelaide were not affected by Super League. The Reds got better crowds in 1997 than 1996. Both clubs drew shit-all in their 2nd years, neither of which was in Super League.

Melbourne contribute nothing to RL and are the definiton of a parasite. They've had zero success off the field, despite having every advantage under the sun handed to them to ensure they are successfulll onfield. More people i Melbourne go watch soccer than the Storm.

Haha that’ll do me,
has stallion moved to Brisbane?

 

[Get Rid of The Donkeys]

The Storm would add lots of value to the broadcast right, you know that thing that props up the whole game and pays all the payers high salaries? Pull Melbourne out and the broadcast money would drop significantly and your Latrell Mitchells, Tedesco's, Taumololo's etc start looking at other sports to play.

Most of the people who watch Storm games on Foxtel are from Queensland and NSW, are they not?

 

[Get Rid of The Donkeys]

There was nothing wrong with the Crushers branding, Lots of people were into them before a ball was even kicked. I remember going to the Ekka in 94 and there was a Crushers showbag and it was very popular. They averaged 21k there first season at the old run down Lang Park. They were getting flogged every week. The Grange was a poor choice to have a Leagues club only a few suburbs away from Red Hill but they weren't trying to be a Grange or North Brisbane team.

They were trying to be a north of the river team as the Donkeys played their games at Nathan, which is in the southeast.

The brand sucked. What does a steam engine train that went out of usage decades earlier got to do with 1990s Brissie or RL? Did they plan on Thomas The Tank Engine fans and men who have train collections flocking to Lang Park? The colours were bizarre. People who resented the Donkeys gave them a go, but couldn't stay interested with a team that had such a a poor brand. Donkeys succeeded because they billed themselves as a mini origin team keeping Brisbane's best players in Brissie, which was their one and only link with Brisbane Rugby league history. Any future team will have to draw on support from the long and storied history of the BRL to succeed as new brands are too reliant on instant success on the field, which is no guarantee.

Grange was Pastoral Brothers Leprechauns stomping grounds. They, alongside the Albion-based Fortitude Valley Diehards and Bardon-based Wests Panthers were hardest hit by the Donkeys because of their close proximity to Red Hill. Crushers basing themselves there was a recipe for disaster.

 

[Get Rid of The Donkeys]

Calling the second Brisbane team the Bombers is akin to the AFL setting up the GWS Rabbitohs
NRL PREMIERSHIP

• June 23, 2020 11:38am
• by THE NRL ECONOMIST
• Source: FOX SPORTS

• Source: FOX SPORTS

Writing exclusively for Fox Sports, The NRL Economist assesses the key issues in the expansion debate and identifies the one team he claims must not be granted the new Brisbane franchise licence.

Traditionally, location has always anchored any comparison of franchise bids for expansion.

However, in this unique instance, the home ground of the competing bids is already designated.

Suncorp Stadium will be the main host, irrespective of which team is granted the 17th licence.

Keep in mind, that the AFL owns the Essendon Bombers trademark, which was filed in 1984. Club officials contacted expressed their amusement at Rugby League’s choice in mimicking the AFL’s Bombers brand. Can you imagine the AFL introducing the GWS Rabbitohs?

However, one must acknowledge the Brisbane Bombers business credentials are superb. Their long line of commercial partners already proudly adorn the proposals webpage. Interestingly, the NRL’s free-to-air broadcasting partner channel 9 has partnered with the Bombers, prior to the governing body deciding who will be granted the licence. No pressure!

Building the Bombers team off the back of slick marketing is risky. Successful teams are built on passion not fashion.

Why is passion so important? A lack of it not just impacts the team, but also burdens other NRL clubs with a poor drawing ‘away team’.

For instance, the hastily conceived South Queensland Crushers team, active between 1995-1997 averaged just 9,860 as the ‘away’ team. Opposition fans just weren’t enticed by the soulless Crushers.

In fact, the average attendance of all Crushers fixtures across Sydney’s venues was an alarming 6,515.

The Crushers brand had no emotive story behind it, with their nickname referring to the major produce of Queensland; sugar cane.

‘Clever’ marketers claimed the name would connect with Rugby League fans. The numbers suggest otherwise and something which acting NRL CEO Andrew Abdo must be acutely aware of.

Those familiar with 1990s sitcom Seinfeld, would recognise the logic in “the opposite” episode, as applied by beloved character George Costanza. The key theme being that if previous decisions have failed, then applying the opposite would have to succeed. Accordingly, it is no surprise that the team with the opposite result in away crowds to the Crushers is the St. George Illawarra Dragons.

The power of the red chevron making them the best drawing away team in the history of the NRL, averaging 19,111 until 2020’s lockouts. Predictably, the tradition behind the Dragons makes them an irresistible attraction.

Introducing a recognised history to an elite competition is the superior option. Whether that be the Easts Tigers backed Firehawks, a River City Bears, or the Redcliffe Dolphins.

An example of the efficacy of utilising a rich history was the promotion of the Port Adelaide Football Club to the AFL in 1997 from their state league. The result? In their debut year, average home-and-away crowds spiked an incredible 12% across all clubs. Port Adelaide’s history concentrated passion in the code, rather than diluting it.

When they play at away venues, opposition fans are hostile and excited. Just the way it should be.

Redcliffe Dolphins Leagues Club produces an annual revenue of $30 million. Its district of the Moreton Bay Region houses 470,000 residents, with a gross regional product of $19 billion. But these factors are not why the Redcliffe Dolphins pitch for NRL inclusion is so strong.

What makes their bid so compelling is the spirit of 73 proud years of passion for their team. A team which strongly resonates with women and children, besotted by their aquatic mascot’s endearing smile.

With some journalists calling the Brisbane Firehawks ‘avian arsonists’, it is perhaps fitting to label the Redcliffe Dolphins the ‘smiling assassins’.

So powerful is the Dolphins brand that trademarking disputes and legal injunctions have ensued over its use.

The Gold Coast Titans initially attempted to adopt the name before the Redcliffe Dolphins filed an injunction which the Gold Coast team accepted just one day before the court hearing. The Gold Coast eventually switched their name to the Titans “as chosen by the fans”.

Protecting the Miami Dolphins, NFL Properties also opposed the registration of the Gold Coast Dolphins on the 28th of April 2005. The NFL also challenged a local Sydney club, the Coogee Dolphins. Upon a variation to the design of Coogee’s logo and a stipulation to never play Gridiron in Australia, Miami consented.

All that for a dolphin.

Not for its charming smile which is an anatomical illusion (the profile of a dolphin’s jaw means their smile is permanent regardless of mood). Rather, the battle for the Dolphin is driven by the years of fluctuating emotions it represents.

How do you grow crowds? Leverage off those same emotions.

And what sort of crowds should we expect?

Figures obtained from one bid team reveal 20,000 as the break-even point for home fixtures at Suncorp. Conservative projections predict an average of 25,000 in an absolute worst case scenario.

Since the Brisbane Broncos home of Suncorp Stadium reopened in 2003, the regular home-and-away average sits at a healthy 32,639. Considering the monopsony the Broncos hold in controlling the cream of Queensland’s talent, it is time to make a decision.

So far, the battle for that 17th licence has been amiable. But frustration is slowly building at the lack of clarity around a decision.

According to the Western Corridor bid team chief Steve Johnson; “We can’t dictate expansion. We can’t force ourselves onto the NRL. If a decision is made now it would be difficult to be ready by 2022. 2023 would be a preferable year”.

Johnson says prior delays in expansion were because former chairman of the Australian Rugby League Commission John Grant surrendered to the influence of the ‘Sydney cartel’.

With that, the collective ears of Bondi and Belmore started burning.

But then again, a Brisbane Bombers licence would deafen them.

Ramy Haidar

The NRL economist is an award-winning writer across 15 years. He also teaches Media Studies as well as having majored in Economics. Catch him on all-new podcast ‘The Front Office’ or follow on Twitter @theNRLeconomist

Gold Coast Dolphins trademark


https://www.foxsports.com.au/nrl/nr...s/news-story/3e46364f647b3f336cd8d47bfca8a084

 

[flippikat]

There's never going to be a team in Adelaide or Perth. Don't take my word for it. Go ask the boss, PVL. He said there will be no expansion into fumbleball states. Ch9 said they are not interested in a Perth team. Broadcasters have a big say on who gets in as they pay the dough.

PVL won't be chairman forever, in fact I doubt he'll be there in 5 years time (was gonna say 3, but I'll be generous).

Ch9 are the *current* FTA partner only. Current. Not necessarily future - and to be honest, they're doing a damn good job of torpedo-ing their chances of being a future FTA partner for the NRL.

If the FTA partner changes, the priorities may change.

You're talking in definite terms about a two industries (sports & media) that are in a huge amount of flux. Never say never.

 

[Perth Red]

PVL won't be chairman forever, in fact I doubt he'll be there in 5 years time (was gonna say 3, but I'll be generous).

Ch9 are the *current* FTA partner only. Current. Not necessarily future - and to be honest, they're doing a damn good job of torpedo-ing their chances of being a future FTA partner for the NRL.

If the FTA partner changes, the priorities may change.

You're talking in definite terms about a two industries (sports & media) that are in a huge amount of flux. Never say never.

I get the sense Beattie had the desire to expand the game, but not the ability. Vlandys has the ability but not the desire. Hopefully the next chairman has desire and ability!

 

[taipan]

I get the sense Beattie had the desire to expand the game, but not the ability. Vlandys has the ability but not the desire. Hopefully the next chairman has desire and ability!

*** duplicate**

 

[taipan]

I get the sense Beattie had the desire to expand the game, but not the ability. Vlandys has the ability but not the desire. Hopefully the next chairman has desire and ability!

Or he just might have the financial understanding
Remember the CEO who had the desire and ability to expand to the GC, and we're still struggling in heartland.

 

[Get Rid of The Donkeys]

PVL won't be chairman forever, in fact I doubt he'll be there in 5 years time (was gonna say 3, but I'll be generous).

Ch9 are the *current* FTA partner only. Current. Not necessarily future - and to be honest, they're doing a damn good job of torpedo-ing their chances of being a future FTA partner for the NRL.

If the FTA partner changes, the priorities may change.

You're talking in definite terms about a two industries (sports & media) that are in a huge amount of flux. Never say never.

Ch7 will rever bid for anything but fumbleball. Gallop, Smith and Greenberg weren't in a hurry to expand into Perth. It's a shame because they could carve out a niche. The Force and Glory don't have a massive fanbase, but their fans are passionate.

 

[The Great Dane]

Calling the second Brisbane team the Bombers is akin to the AFL setting up the GWS Rabbitohs
NRL PREMIERSHIP

• June 23, 2020 11:38am
• by THE NRL ECONOMIST
• Source: FOX SPORTS

• Source: FOX SPORTS

Writing exclusively for Fox Sports, The NRL Economist assesses the key issues in the expansion debate and identifies the one team he claims must not be granted the new Brisbane franchise licence.

Traditionally, location has always anchored any comparison of franchise bids for expansion.

However, in this unique instance, the home ground of the competing bids is already designated.

Suncorp Stadium will be the main host, irrespective of which team is granted the 17th licence.

Keep in mind, that the AFL owns the Essendon Bombers trademark, which was filed in 1984. Club officials contacted expressed their amusement at Rugby League’s choice in mimicking the AFL’s Bombers brand. Can you imagine the AFL introducing the GWS Rabbitohs?

However, one must acknowledge the Brisbane Bombers business credentials are superb. Their long line of commercial partners already proudly adorn the proposals webpage. Interestingly, the NRL’s free-to-air broadcasting partner channel 9 has partnered with the Bombers, prior to the governing body deciding who will be granted the licence. No pressure!

Building the Bombers team off the back of slick marketing is risky. Successful teams are built on passion not fashion.

Why is passion so important? A lack of it not just impacts the team, but also burdens other NRL clubs with a poor drawing ‘away team’.

For instance, the hastily conceived South Queensland Crushers team, active between 1995-1997 averaged just 9,860 as the ‘away’ team. Opposition fans just weren’t enticed by the soulless Crushers.

In fact, the average attendance of all Crushers fixtures across Sydney’s venues was an alarming 6,515.

The Crushers brand had no emotive story behind it, with their nickname referring to the major produce of Queensland; sugar cane.

‘Clever’ marketers claimed the name would connect with Rugby League fans. The numbers suggest otherwise and something which acting NRL CEO Andrew Abdo must be acutely aware of.

Those familiar with 1990s sitcom Seinfeld, would recognise the logic in “the opposite” episode, as applied by beloved character George Costanza. The key theme being that if previous decisions have failed, then applying the opposite would have to succeed. Accordingly, it is no surprise that the team with the opposite result in away crowds to the Crushers is the St. George Illawarra Dragons.

The power of the red chevron making them the best drawing away team in the history of the NRL, averaging 19,111 until 2020’s lockouts. Predictably, the tradition behind the Dragons makes them an irresistible attraction.

Introducing a recognised history to an elite competition is the superior option. Whether that be the Easts Tigers backed Firehawks, a River City Bears, or the Redcliffe Dolphins.

An example of the efficacy of utilising a rich history was the promotion of the Port Adelaide Football Club to the AFL in 1997 from their state league. The result? In their debut year, average home-and-away crowds spiked an incredible 12% across all clubs. Port Adelaide’s history concentrated passion in the code, rather than diluting it.

When they play at away venues, opposition fans are hostile and excited. Just the way it should be.

Redcliffe Dolphins Leagues Club produces an annual revenue of $30 million. Its district of the Moreton Bay Region houses 470,000 residents, with a gross regional product of $19 billion. But these factors are not why the Redcliffe Dolphins pitch for NRL inclusion is so strong.

What makes their bid so compelling is the spirit of 73 proud years of passion for their team. A team which strongly resonates with women and children, besotted by their aquatic mascot’s endearing smile.

With some journalists calling the Brisbane Firehawks ‘avian arsonists’, it is perhaps fitting to label the Redcliffe Dolphins the ‘smiling assassins’.

So powerful is the Dolphins brand that trademarking disputes and legal injunctions have ensued over its use.

The Gold Coast Titans initially attempted to adopt the name before the Redcliffe Dolphins filed an injunction which the Gold Coast team accepted just one day before the court hearing. The Gold Coast eventually switched their name to the Titans “as chosen by the fans”.

Protecting the Miami Dolphins, NFL Properties also opposed the registration of the Gold Coast Dolphins on the 28th of April 2005. The NFL also challenged a local Sydney club, the Coogee Dolphins. Upon a variation to the design of Coogee’s logo and a stipulation to never play Gridiron in Australia, Miami consented.

All that for a dolphin.

Not for its charming smile which is an anatomical illusion (the profile of a dolphin’s jaw means their smile is permanent regardless of mood). Rather, the battle for the Dolphin is driven by the years of fluctuating emotions it represents.

How do you grow crowds? Leverage off those same emotions.

And what sort of crowds should we expect?

Figures obtained from one bid team reveal 20,000 as the break-even point for home fixtures at Suncorp. Conservative projections predict an average of 25,000 in an absolute worst case scenario.

Since the Brisbane Broncos home of Suncorp Stadium reopened in 2003, the regular home-and-away average sits at a healthy 32,639. Considering the monopsony the Broncos hold in controlling the cream of Queensland’s talent, it is time to make a decision.

So far, the battle for that 17th licence has been amiable. But frustration is slowly building at the lack of clarity around a decision.

According to the Western Corridor bid team chief Steve Johnson; “We can’t dictate expansion. We can’t force ourselves onto the NRL. If a decision is made now it would be difficult to be ready by 2022. 2023 would be a preferable year”.

Johnson says prior delays in expansion were because former chairman of the Australian Rugby League Commission John Grant surrendered to the influence of the ‘Sydney cartel’.

With that, the collective ears of Bondi and Belmore started burning.

But then again, a Brisbane Bombers licence would deafen them.

Ramy Haidar

The NRL economist is an award-winning writer across 15 years. He also teaches Media Studies as well as having majored in Economics. Catch him on all-new podcast ‘The Front Office’ or follow on Twitter @theNRLeconomist

Gold Coast Dolphins trademark


https://www.foxsports.com.au/nrl/nr...s/news-story/3e46364f647b3f336cd8d47bfca8a084

What a terrible argument.

It asserts that history is the best, or even only, strong selling point, then cherry picks one statistic at one club (Dragon's away average), then presents that one statistic almost completely out of context.

For a start if you are going to argue that history is the best selling point then you have to explain why clubs without long and storied histories have been successful, often more successful than a lot of the "historic" clubs, which he/she hasn't done.

Obviously just looking at average away attendance is stupid because it's only one factor, and an extremely minor one at that (especially when considering that it should be the home teams responsibility to draw strong crowds to their games), but cherry picking just the Dragons away average is disingenuous at best.

Firstly since half the competition reside in the same city as them it makes it significantly easier to draw high away attendance averages for Sydney clubs, I wouldn't be surprised if that fact alone was enough to make sure that all your average Sydney clubs have a higher away average than the non-Sydney clubs in your average year.

But even ignoring that fact, why cherry pick the Dragons, I mean the argument is that history is the main or best selling point for a team so why not look at the most historic clubs: the last two foundation clubs. Surely if history was the best selling point they, as the most historic clubs, have not only the highest away attendance, but the biggest fan bases in general!

I can't be bothered to look up the actual statistics, but I don't think I need too to say A. the Roosters have one of the smallest fan bases in the league, and B. the Broncos, Storm, Knights, etc have some of the biggest and none of them are what you could call historic clubs (yet). If it was true that history was the biggest, or only, major selling point then neither of those facts would be true, so there must be more factors then just history, and arguments from tradition (which is effectively what this is) aren't very helpful.

All his branding stuff is totally subjective and illogical as well..

 

[greenBV4]

More people i Melbourne go watch soccer than the Storm.

you've used this "argument" in a few threads now
That soccer club your refering to (Victory) also outdraws the average of every NRL club except the Broncos, and for a city-based example, Sydney FC outdraws a handfull of Sydney NRL clubs. So your argument isn't as good at bashing the Storm as you think it is