What's new
The Front Row Forums

Register a free account today to become a member of the world's largest Rugby League discussion forum! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

Redcliffe put their hand up

Messages
14,822
No one is saying Brisbane must have teams with attendances between 30k and 40k but why wouldn't that be the aim of an expansion club in a Rugby League mad city? I don't expect a second Brisbane team to be as big and popular as the Broncos but they could be close to.

Who knows maybe Redcliffe could be a big club drawing over 25k but not if they play most of their games at Dolphin oval.
You want two big clubs, based in City of Brisbane.

PR has said on many occasions that Brisbane Broncos and Brisbane 2 must draw 45k and 35k and operate on $30-$40 million.

Dane says the club must be drawing massive crowds and be based in the City of Brisbane with a neutral identify. He becomes rabid and psychotic if anyone says they would like a local team to have the honour of being Brisbane's second team, even though it's none of his business as he's not going to be supporting the winning bid.

The bloke from NZ reckons Perth should have as many teams as Brisbane. WTF? Talk about crazy!

Why can't Brisbane 2 be no bigger or smaller than any of the other 15 clubs?

Yes it would be nice to have 2, 3 or 4 massive clubs. But, we need to be realistic. Broncos are an anomaly. There's no guarantee that a "neutral" brand based in the City of Brisbane will be a carbon copy of the Broncos. My bet is a team in Moreton Bay/Sunshine Coast, one in Logan/Redland/Easts territory and one in Ipswich would be the best as they wouldn't eat away at Broncos too much and, they would bring new fans to the game who live on the outskirts. Of course I am thinking long term and wouldn't add them all at once.

Shouldn't the RL fans in Brisbane get to decide what their teams are called and how big they get?
 
Last edited:

greenBV4

Bench
Messages
2,510
Why are people so obsessed with NRL clubs not drawing the same number of attendees as AwFuL, EPL and NFL?

The NRL is the highest attended club competition for either code of "rugby" in the world.

English RU Club Competition
Gallagher Premiership 19/20 Home

Leicester Tigers

19,786 (5 games)
Bristol Bears
17,131 (4 games)
Bath
14,175 (4 games)
Harlequins
13,900 (4 games)
Gloucester
13,806 (5 games)
Northampton Saints
13,128 (5 games)
Exeter Chiefs
12,003 (4 games)
London Wasps
10,965 (4 games)
Worcester Warriors
7,925 (4 games)
Saracens
7,083 (5 games)
Sale Sharks
6,588 (4 games)
London Irish
4,831 (4 games)
Total
11,905

https://rugby.statbunker.com/competitions/HomeAttendance?comp_id=609

French Top 14 18/19
French RU Club Competition

Racing CF

20,866 (1 game)
Clermont Auvergne
18,674 (2 games)
Toulouse
18,669 (2 games)
La Rochelle
16,000 (2 games)
Grenoble
11,750 (2 games)
Castres
11,744 (2 games)
Lyon OU
13,527 (1 game)
Stade Francais
9,623 (1 game)
Agen
9,298 (1 game)
TOTAL
14,785

https://rugby.statbunker.com/competitions/HomeAttendance?comp_id=584

Going by those numbers we can say all 16 clubs are doing really well.

So why does Perth Red and mongoose single out Brisbane as the only place in the entire world that must have over 40k attending the Broncos and another 30k for Brisbane 2?

The arguments against Redcliffe and Ipswich are always that these teams will not draw 35k.

So what if they don't?

The Broncos are the only "rugby" club in the world that draws upwards of 33k to its home games. That makes them an outlier, not the norm. To expect Brisbane 2 to pull off something that no other "rugby" club in the world has been able to manage after more than 100 years is unrealistic.
You tried to use the Storm's crowd average to bring them down (as usual) but once it was pointed out to you that AAMI park is the 4th best drawing NRL stadium in the league you have done a complete 180 backflip and are now saying why does the NRL need bigger crowds? Which one is it?

the NRL is a much better sport to watch than AFL and has the potential for larger crowds than it gets - the AFL is a world-wide anomoly though.

But under 9k-11k for teams in the teams heartland is well below what should be the bar - heartland teams should be easily outdrawing expansion sides, the fact that they aren't shows that the market is oversaturated.
 
Messages
14,822
You tried to use the Storm's crowd average to bring them down (as usual) but once it was pointed out to you that AAMI park is the 4th best drawing NRL stadium in the league you have done a complete 180 backflip and are now saying why does the NRL need bigger crowds? Which one is it?

the NRL is a much better sport to watch than AFL and has the potential for larger crowds than it gets - the AFL is a world-wide anomoly though.

But under 9k-11k for teams in the teams heartland is well below what should be the bar - heartland teams should be easily outdrawing expansion sides, the fact that they aren't shows that the market is oversaturated.
I brought up Melbourne Storm's crowds for 2 reasons a) to put Perth Red's unrealistic criticism of Brisbane's 33k average in perspective and b) point out that if the so-called world's sports capital can only reel in 16k with a team that's been dominant for 15 years then maybe we should lower our expectations. I was well aware of where Storm's crowds stood in the pecking order as I regularly browse attendance records.

I agree that RL is a better game to watch, especially on TV where all the main action is within a 20 metre window. This is both a blessing and a curse, as it makes it much harder to see everything from the stands when the ball is up the other end. People are less willing to go to the games for this reason.

I think 15,000 to 20,000 is probably the best we will see at club level. I wish the season average across the league was 30k, but history suggests this number is unattainable.

Fumbleball is played on a 135-175m oval where players are positioned from post to post. You cannot appreciate what's happening off the ball unless you're at the game. Soccer is also a bit like this, but to a lesser extent.
 
Last edited:

Perth Red

Post Whore
Messages
69,520
Ok for one they are directly competing with the broncos on their turf for everything. That means to not be a flop they are going to have to have the financial clout to compete with them for hearts and minds and sponsors. That will require a significant revenue which in reality will primarily come from fanbase. Is a 15k club in Brisbane going to survive let alone thrive? Doubtful.

then We’ve got the nutter telling us there should be 3 or 4 clubs in Brisbane. Well if we can’t even get a second one that can get a sizeable fanbase why the hell would you cannibalise what fans and sponsors there are into 3 or 4 pieces?

then You’ve got the desire to see games at Suncorp every weekend , last thing the game needs is another Anz with the stadium onLy 1/3 full for brisbane2 games.

So does Brisbane 2 have to get 20k plus crowds? Well probably if they want to survive, and definitely if what we are led to believe that the city is gagging for another club.
 
Messages
14,822
Ok for one they are directly competing with the broncos on their turf for everything. That means to not be a flop they are going to have to have the financial clout to compete with them for hearts and minds and sponsors. That will require a significant revenue which in reality will primarily come from fanbase. Is a 15k club in Brisbane going to survive let alone thrive? Doubtful.

This is just not true and shows how little you know about Brisbane.

If Brisbane 2 set up their base at Grange, like the Crushers did, then yeah, they would be right in the middle of Broncos territory. There's a reason the 3 BRL clubs closest to Red Hill went bust. Pastoral Brothers Leprechauns were at Grange. Fortitude Valley Diehards were at Albion. Western Suburbs Panthers were at Bardon. All of these suburbs are just a few minutes away from Red Hill.

The BRL clubs on the other side of town are stronger than ever. So nice try soapdodger, but once again you fail miserably. Easts Tigers are so strong they were asked to bail the ailing Broncos Leagues Club out a few years back. Dolphins, Seagulls and Tigers Leagues Clubs shit all over the Broncos Leagues.
then We’ve got the nutter telling us there should be 3 or 4 clubs in Brisbane. Well if we can’t even get a second one that can get a sizeable fanbase why the hell would you cannibalise what fans and sponsors there are into 3 or 4 pieces?
You don't know what the fanbase will be like, so STFU. What we do know is it will be bigger than anything a Perth-based team can muster.

Brisbane 2 does not need to draw attendances of 30,000 to survive. 15k will probably be enough for them to cover stadium costs and make a small profit. They will have a Leagues Club to offset losses.

The Broncos survived and thrived when just 19k attended their games after Super League.

Compare that with your idiotic Perth idea. Western Australia's government forbids electronic gambling machines in licenced venues, so no Leagues Club for the Pirates. RL in Perth is a distant 4th behind fumbleball, soccer and RU. Good luck getting sponsors when you're at the bottom of the pile. The RU team couldn't compete with the other Australian Super Rugby clubs, despite having billionaires supporting them and a larger base to draw support.

Recent crowds for the Force have ranged from 8,000 to 11,500.

https://www.rugbypass.com/news/falling-attendance-could-spell-the-end-of-the-western-force/

If the Force cannot do it in a tiny sport like RU where the costs of running a team are far lower, how are the Pirates going to manage?

The Glory need to draw attendances of 13k+ just to break even because of the extra costs that the owners of Perth Oval charge. They get no where near it.

Can you be certain the Pirates will get 13k+ to their games?

The Western Reds couldn't even get 9k after their first season. The Force are now getting 8k, and have a larger base to draw upon than the Pirates.

You refuse to acknowledge these facts.
then You’ve got the desire to see games at Suncorp every weekend , last thing the game needs is another Anz with the stadium onLy 1/3 full for brisbane2 games.
Having Brisbane 2 play every game at Lang Park is as dumb as having the Panthers make the SFS their home ground. Brisbane is a big place and hard to navigate if you live on the outskirts.

Have you never even been to Brisbane for any length of time?

It can take anywhere from 30 to 60 minutes to drive from the outer southern suburbs of City of Brisbane to Milton. Even longer if you get the bus. Add more time on for games played on a Friday night as traffic is jammed up in the city. It has taken me up to 1 and a half hours to get from the northern suburbs of Logan to Lang Park on a Friday for a game that kicked off at 7pm.

The best thing the NRL can do is put a team in the north, one in the west and one in the south so that everyone in the greater Brisbane region has a chance of attending RL games. You're not going to get people from the outskirts to travel to Milton 12 times a year. The sooner you get that through your thick skull, the better.
So does Brisbane 2 have to get 20k plus crowds? Well probably if they want to survive, and definitely if what we are led to believe that the city is gagging for another club.
BS. All they need is enough to cover stadium hire costs. If Redcliffe plays at Dolphin Oval they won't have any hire costs as they own the f**ken ground. For all we know, 11.5k at Dolphin Oval might be more profitable than 20k at Lang Park.

Having 3 or 4 teams means more local derbies. The Cowboys vs Broncos games draws over 40k, despite there being a greater distance between Brisbane and Townsville than Brisbane and Sydney. Take the bigger intra-city derbies to Lang Park and you've got around 30,000 to 40,000 people attending. Possibly more. The smaller games can be played in smaller venues closer to the fanbase.
 
Last edited:

mongoose

Coach
Messages
11,808
lol the NRL is not going to introduce another 3 Brisbane teams in anyone on this forums lifetimes. It's so pie in the sky I don't know why you keep pushing it. Brisbane has been a 1 team town for the best part of 30 years, the Broncos and their powerbrokers have not wanted another team. The Titans currently are concerned about a 2nd Brisbane team. So when the 2nd Brisbane team finally gets introduced do you think that they, the Broncos and Titans are going to be welcoming to a 3rd Brisbane club anytime soon? It will be another 30 years before they even entertain that idea. Will the NRL even exist in 30 years?
 

reanimate

Bench
Messages
3,862
lol the NRL is not going to introduce another 3 Brisbane teams in anyone on this forums lifetimes. It's so pie in the sky I don't know why you keep pushing it. Brisbane has been a 1 team town for the best part of 30 years, the Broncos and their powerbrokers have not wanted another team. The Titans currently are concerned about a 2nd Brisbane team. So when the 2nd Brisbane team finally gets introduced do you think that they, the Broncos and Titans are going to be welcoming to a 3rd Brisbane club anytime soon? It will be another 30 years before they even entertain that idea. Will the NRL even exist in 30 years?
Let’s aim for 4 Brisbane teams, but let’s ignore putting one team in another Australian city of 3+ million where the demographics will continue to become more favourable for us in the future.
 

T-Boon

Coach
Messages
15,854
lol the NRL is not going to introduce another 3 Brisbane teams in anyone on this forums lifetimes. It's so pie in the sky I don't know why you keep pushing it.

What if we have another pandemic that is worse than this one in our life time. That is easily conceivable and would probably lead to radical change with the way the NRL is doing things.
 
Messages
14,822
lol the NRL is not going to introduce another 3 Brisbane teams in anyone on this forums lifetimes. It's so pie in the sky I don't know why you keep pushing it. Brisbane has been a 1 team town for the best part of 30 years, the Broncos and their powerbrokers have not wanted another team. The Titans currently are concerned about a 2nd Brisbane team. So when the 2nd Brisbane team finally gets introduced do you think that they, the Broncos and Titans are going to be welcoming to a 3rd Brisbane club anytime soon? It will be another 30 years before they even entertain that idea. Will the NRL even exist in 30 years?
It's no more pie in the sky than advocating for Adelaide and Perth.

The NRL ruled out Adelaide and Perth, yet you and your mates keep pushing for it.

There is no bid from Adelaide and the Perth consortium is a joke that deserves to be rejected.

I've just explained why it's impossible for a Perth team to survive in the NRL, FFS.

Brisbane 2 and 3 will be sustainable and bring money into the game. In 20-25 years Brisbane 4 can be introduced. The Broncos and News Ltd have held the game back for decades. It's time for both of them to get stuffed.

Laugh all you like, but if Firehawks and Dolphins check all the boxes, which they do, then it'll only be a matter of time until both are in the NRL. There's your north and south teams covered. Then it's onto Ipswich in 20 years.
 

mongoose

Coach
Messages
11,808
It's no more pie in the sky than advocating for Adelaide and Perth.

The NRL ruled out Adelaide and Perth, yet you and your mates keep pushing for it.

There is no bid from Adelaide and the Perth consortium is a joke that deserves to be rejected.

I've just explained why it's impossible for a Perth team to survive in the NRL, FFS.

Brisbane 2 and 3 will be sustainable and bring money into the game. In 20-25 years Brisbane 4 can be introduced. The Broncos and News Ltd have held the game back for decades. It's time for both of them to get stuffed.

Laugh all you like, but if Firehawks and Dolphins check all the boxes, which they do, then it'll only be a matter of time until both are in the NRL. There's your north and south teams covered. Then it's onto Ipswich in 20 years.

A Perth NRL team has been seriously discussed for close to 10 years now. From what I've seen dividing Brisbane up into 4 teams has not been on the table... and before you mention it I know that 1 single guy you keep latching onto - Colin smith said Brisbane should have more than 2 teams and Perth none, but he is 1 person.
 
Messages
14,822
A Perth NRL team has been seriously discussed for close to 10 years now. From what I've seen dividing Brisbane up into 4 teams has not been on the table... and before you mention it I know that 1 single guy you keep latching onto - Colin smith said Brisbane should have more than 2 teams and Perth none, but he is 1 person.
Now you're making up shit. No one from the ARLC has come out and said Perth is going to get a team over the last 10 years. When asked, Greenberg said there will be no team for Perth. PVL said there will be no team for Perth. If you and PR think that means there's going to be a team in Perth then you're living with the fairies.

The ARLC tested the waters by taking premiership games to Perth Oval. The crowds were shit and dropped over time. I wouldn't be surprised if that sealed Perth’s fate.

Don't be a loony like PR. He's gone mad because PVL dared to say the one thing that was kept secret by previous leaders. It's a good thing PVL had the guts to reveal the truth.
 

greenBV4

Bench
Messages
2,510
He's gone mad because PVL dared to say the one thing that was kept secret by previous leaders. It's a good thing PVL had the guts to reveal the truth.
That the NRL is insecure and has no idea how to grow the game outside of 2 states?

They can spin it as "it's not worth it" all they want but reality is they have NFI how to, and no balls what so ever, so they wont even try

Do you think companies like apple and google made it big keeping it safe? the NRL is a business, businesses should strive for growth, growth rarely comes from playing it safe and having no innovation.
 
Messages
14,822
That the NRL is insecure and has no idea how to grow the game outside of 2 states?

They can spin it as "it's not worth it" all they want but reality is they have NFI how to, and no balls what so ever, so they wont even try

Do you think companies like apple and google made it big keeping it safe? the NRL is a business, businesses should strive for growth, growth rarely comes from playing it safe and having no innovation.
Right or wrong, that's their stance on Perth. I agree with their stance.

I'm under no illusion that there will ever be 4 teams in Brisbane, for what it's worth. I just state my opinion on what I believe would be best for the game. PR, Dane and mongoose mock it because they're narrow-minded and cannot see past Adelaide and Perth. I recall people mocking titocolumbiano for advocating the Redcliffe bid a few years back. It's now been revealed that Redcliffe are the leading contender. So yeah, forgive me for not taking the naysayers and dreamers seriously when they laugh at the Brisbane bids.

I can see a 3rd Brisbane team being introduced one day. If there's angst about having a bye and Brisbane 2 succeeds, then the broadcasters and ARLC will want more of it, especially since there's multiple bids from Brisbane that tick all the boxes. Bids that are safe and will create blockbuster derbies that will generate revenue for the NRL and its broadcasters. Plus Colin Smith has given it his approval, which is important as the ARLC respects his opinion and has worked with him in the past. He's against Adelaide and Perth.

You can ridicule the ARLC if it makes you feel better, but it won't bring a Perth team into the NRL. I do see the irony in the ARLC knocking back Adelaide and Perth after PR and co have sat on here for years going on about how those two cities are so important and speaking ill of Brisbane and Sydney. It proves that the popular opinion on this sub-forum is wrong.
 
Last edited:

mongoose

Coach
Messages
11,808
Right or wrong, that's their stance on Perth. I agree with their stance.

I'm under no illusion that there will ever be 4 teams in Brisbane, for what it's worth. I just state my opinion on what I believe would be best for the game. PR, Dane and mongoose mock it because they're narrow-minded and cannot see past Adelaide and Perth. I recall people mocking titocolumbiano for advocating the Redcliffe bid a few years back. It's now been revealed that Redcliffe are the leading contender. So yeah, forgive me for not taking the naysayers and dreamers seriously when they laugh at the Brisbane bids.

I can see a 3rd Brisbane team being introduced one day. If there's angst about having a bye and Brisbane 2 succeeds, then the broadcasters and ARLC will want more of it, especially since there's multiple bids from Brisbane that tick all the boxes. Bids that are safe and will create blockbuster derbies that will generate revenue for the NRL and its broadcasters. Plus Colin Smith has given it his approval, which is important as the ARLC respects his opinion and has worked with him in the past. He's against Adelaide and Perth.

You can ridicule the ARLC if it makes you feel better, but it won't bring a Perth team into the NRL. I do see the irony in the ARLC knocking back Adelaide and Perth after PR and co have sat on here for years going on about how those two cities are so important and speaking ill of Brisbane and Sydney. It proves that the popular opinion on this sub-forum is wrong.

There is no right or wrong here you jackass. No body knows what the NRL will look like down the track, it's all just ideas at the moment. I don't recall anyone mocking titocolumbiano as he is open to all ideas and is for expansion into non heartland states. You are vehemently against expansion outside of QLD/NSW and argue non stop with anyone who advocates it but you have no idea what's best for the game and just cherry pick quotes and stats from 25 years ago and then claim your point of view has been proven.
 
Messages
14,822
There is no right or wrong here you jackass.
So why do you, Dane and PR get so angry when some one with a different opinion to you goes against the flow and says they like Sydney the way it is, want to see Brisbane properly represented and couldn't care less about wasting licences on fumbleball wastelands that don't give a f**k about our game?

From the moment I got here I've had to contend with you three. Whenever a post about a Brisbane bid is introduced it is pounced on by Dane, PR and you to state how the bid must be to your liking and how only 1 is to be allowed so that unwanted teams that will go arse up within a couple of years can be put in Adelaide and Perth.
No body knows what the NRL will look like down the track, it's all just ideas at the moment.
So why the mockery about Brisbane having 3 or 4 clubs by 2050?

I get called crazy for believing it's feasible to have 3 or 4 teams in Brisbane by 2050, when the population will be near 5,000,000. Meanwhile we have flippikat thinking Perth should have 2 and ridiculing me for suggesting that NZ should have 3 at some stage.

You cannot deny that the leader of the game ruled out expansion into Adelaide and Perth. That's a fact that has riled up PR like a jack-in-a-box.

You cannot deny that the broadcasters do not stand to gain anything from teams in Adelaide and Perth. So you can rule out the possibility of Ch9 or Foxtel pushing for teams in these areas. We do know that Ch9 has publicly stated that they want a second Brisbane team. PR is now claiming they didn't really mean it, FFS.

A media analayst who has worked with the ARLC on previous broadcast deals said forget Adelaide and Perth, concentrate on Bris 2, NZ2 and Bris3, in that exact order. So we know of at least one person, who has clout with the ARLC, has advocated for my position and rejected yours. We also know the leader of the game rejected your position.

When is it going to sink in that your ideas have been rejected?

The only "crazy" on here is the refusal to accept cold hard facts, and the only people guilty of this are you, PR and Dane.

I don't recall anyone mocking titocolumbiano as he is open to all ideas and is for expansion into non heartland states.
He is pro-Redcliffe and Ipswich and said the next team will be the Dolphins. I've seen people on here laugh at the suggestion that Redcliffe be given the go-ahead.

You are vehemently against expansion outside of QLD/NSW and argue non stop with anyone who advocates it but you have no idea what's best for the game and just cherry pick quotes and stats from 25 years ago and then claim your point of view has been proven.
This is just not true. I've advocated for weak Sydney clubs that are squeezed out of that market to relocate to Adelaide and Perth. But that's not good enough for PR and Dane. Those two want it to be a brand new team with its own identity.

I was ridiculed for suggesting the Tigers become the Western Tigers or Western Magpies, half owned by Western Suburbs and the other half by the consortium running the Perth bid, playing six games in Perth. I also met opposition when I suggested Manly should relocate to Gosford or Adelaide to allow the Roosters to take over northern Sydney.

I have not cherry picked any f**ken stats or quotes. You just don't like it because the stats and quotes don't paint expansion into Perth favourably.
 
Last edited:

flippikat

First Grade
Messages
5,215
That the NRL is insecure and has no idea how to grow the game outside of 2 states?

They can spin it as "it's not worth it" all they want but reality is they have NFI how to, and no balls what so ever, so they wont even try

Do you think companies like apple and google made it big keeping it safe? the NRL is a business, businesses should strive for growth, growth rarely comes from playing it safe and having no innovation.

The NRL is hamstrung when it comes to expansion, because the existing clubs (especially the Sydney contingent) are fearful of having more teams slicing up "the pie" 17 or 18 ways instead of 16. "The Pie" being not just financial, but the playing & coaching pool too - right through from promising juniors to first grade coaching staff.

What they don't appreciate is that expansion done well will GROW the pie, meaning 1/18th could be bigger than 1/16th. Perth for instance has a local league scene that's really growing, a unique TV timeslot opportunity, and a market that no other NRL team can bring sponsors to.
 

The Great Dane

First Grade
Messages
7,957
I suspect so. He's on ignore for me now too. The argument just goes round in circles.
He doesn't have an argument, which is why he is such a waste of time.

No matter how logical or reasonable you try to be sometimes it's simply impossible to get people to give up things they hold as articles of faith.

Everyone should just ignore him until he goes away.
 
Last edited:
Top