TWO new Brisbane teams

[Perth Red]

Seeing as there are a lot of Broncos fans but many of them stop going once the team performs badly you have to wonder how keen they are as Broncos fans.
Are they just Broncos fans because there is no other team to support in Brisbane and would they drop the Broncos or possibly decide to support both teams. Valid question.
The new teams would not just target non Broncos fans, existing Broncos fans are a target as well.

They've got about a 12% drop off in crowd avg from when they are doing well to when they are doing poorly. That is better than Souths who have around a 40% drop off, Canterbury around 25%, Eels 25% Dragons 20% etc. All clubs have band wagoners.
The idea of cannabilisng the only decent attendance in the game isnt that appealing! Surely the idea of a new club is to attract new fans otherwise whats the point?

 

[Get Rid of The Donkeys]

If the Broncos were coming close to selling out games, then I'd be all for a 2nd Brisbane team. But there's always plenty of seats free at Broncos games. If Brisbane was such a massive rugby league town, then the games would sell out.

Look at the FTA TV ratings in Brisbane.

173k ave for Broncos.
157k ave for Cowboys.
157k ave for Titans.
150k ave for Storm.
100k ave for everyone else.

Lions get under 40k.
Reds and Roar do not draw shit.

62k registered RL players in Queensland. Most of them are in southeast Queensland. Numbers are growing. Fumbleball has about a third of that.

Brisbane is a RL city. Broncos only get 35k because they are a divisive club that never endeared themselves to the public. They're owned by News Ltd, created Super League, refused to honour the deals they set up with the BRL in 1988 and used their position to chase the Crushers and Chargers away. That's a recipe bound to get people offside. People who were around to witness this and appalled by it aren't going to ignore it and go watch the Donkeys play at Lang Park. There are people who refuse to buy The Courier Mail or subscribe to Foxtel out of protest of Murdoch and Super League. Fat chance getting them to go support the team that engineered it.

You said some crap about a new club needing 25k. When Broncos came into the NSWRL their ave was 16k. Clubs take time to grow. Crushers ave was more in their debut season.

 

[The Great Dane]

Brisbane is a RL city. Broncos only get 35k because they are a divisive club that never endeared themselves to the public. They're owned by News Ltd, created Super League, refused to honour the deals they set up with the BRL in 1988 and used their position to chase the Crushers and Chargers away. That's a recipe bound to get people offside. People who were around to witness this and appalled by it aren't going to ignore it and go watch the Donkeys play at Lang Park. There are people who refuse to buy The Courier Mail or subscribe to Foxtel out of protest of Murdoch and Super League. Fat chance getting them to go support the team that engineered it.

I hate this revisionist history crap.

The BRL were not innocent in their relationship with the Broncos. They thought that by supporting the Broncos bid and giving them a 30% partnership in the QRL that that meant that they had the right to control the Broncos by telling them who they could and couldn't do business with and under what circumstances.

Firstly, the Broncos did honour their deals with the QRL when they were in place ($500k to the QRL, an annual payment of $10k to each QRL club, and underwrote their sponsorship in 1987), that was never an issue. The problems came when the QRL (through the NSWRL) tried to veto the Broncos sponsorship with Powers because they had a working relationship with XXXX, then despite telling the Broncos they could use Lang Park for training they wouldn't let them use it, which forced the Broncos to go out and buy Red Hill at a massive expense to themselves, and it just snowballed from there and got worse and worse.

BRL representatives bagging the Broncos and trying to undermine their business dealings got so bad that the Broncos almost took a few of their representatives to court for defamation after they called them "crooks and thieves" in front of sponsors and journalists at a corporate event, which is when as a favour to the QRL, and the fact that it was a favour to the QRL should tell you something, the NSWRL stepped in and helped the Broncos get out of their deal with the QRL so it didn't go to court.

I'm not saying that the Broncos were innocent in the relationship, because they certainly weren't, but this narrative that goes around that the BRL were just the naive innocent little guys that were taken in and bullied by the big bad corporation is utter bull shit.
They tried to play power games and milk the Broncos for all they were worth, it didn't work and they got burnt, and now they are trying to play the victim.

 

[pennywisealfie]

Nice post TGD. I guess that's why you're on that Donkey guys ignore list, because the truth hurts.

 

[pennywisealfie]

Brisbane is a RL city. Broncos only get 35k because they are a divisive club that never endeared themselves to the public.

Not everyone thinks like you, champ.

Brisbane isn't that big of a RL city. The people of Brisbane have had a team in the national competition for over 30 years and a second team to follow only an hour away, if they can't bring themselves to go to Suncorp for whatever reason. Both fail to sell out games or even come close.

I went to a Broncos game once with a "Brisbane RL fan" and he asked me where Thurston was. Homie couldn't tell the difference between the Broncos and the QLD origin team.

Broncos fans aren't loyal at all, there'd only be a minority that are. A lot of people prefer the Origin team. After what Greg Inglis did to the Broncos, his first game back everyone cheered him because he was a QLD player, they'd already forgotten he had backstabbed us.

If you think a 2nd Brisbane team will all of a sudden get those same people to all jump ship to the new team and be super loyal for no reason to a team with no history, then I'm selling a bridge yada yada.

At this point, I've probably said enough. Bring in a second team. I couldn't care less anymore. I'm going to quote all of my posts when I'm right because I'm a petty motherf**ker.

 

[Get Rid of The Donkeys]

Nice post TGD. I guess that's why you're on that Donkey guys ignore list, because the truth hurts.

TGD is an unstable troll. That's why I put him on ignore. He tries to present his opinions as "facts", and when people present evidence to prove he's wrong, he gets all petty and acts as if they've committed blasphemy. Other people have him on ignore, too. Muga B was the one who suggested I put TGD on ignore and I'm glad he did.

TGD claims Adelaide and Perth are more valuable than Bris 3 and 4, yet no one in the industry backs up his opinion. Media analyst Colin Smith had this to say about expansion.

"Australia’s leading expert on sports rights, Global Sport and Media’s Colin Smith says, "It appears neither the ARLC nor the NRL clubs have a strategy here.

"With the real and present cautionary future of the AFL that has solidified its base in Sydney with the Swans, its overall financial muscle and long-term thinking building a similar position for western Sydney, Gold Coast and Brisbane, the AFL by 2035-40 could be the national football code.

"This will push the NRL into a second-rung sport. It is a must for the NRL to have a comprehensive strategy that further strengthens and grows the sport on the eastern seaboard."

Smith adds: "I anticipate the NRL will get less broadcast income in the next deal unless they can develop some competitive tension or offer a more attractive product such as a second Brisbane team. Queenslanders watch the Broncos No.1, followed by the Cowboys, the Storm and the Titans.

"The NRL future strategy must be predicated on growing and strengthening its footprint. He says this should entail the consideration of:

* Retention of all existing clubs but, with clubs guaranteed annual grants of 130 per cent of the salary cap, "bailouts" must become only a last resort;

* No relocations of existing teams;

* Any new team must have the essence of tribal roots either by region or historic grouping;

* Any regional expansion must not have any other professional sport clubs in their potential area

* Immediate expansion to include another Brisbane team;

* Longer term expansion of the NRL to 20 teams with two divisions of 10 teams;

* Likely expansion, subject to a detailed review, must ensure growth in broadcast and club viability. The priority, in order, would be another team in NZ, a third team in Brisbane, another team in Melbourne and potentially a team in PNG;

* An expansion of the international game, capitalising on the passion NRL players have to represent their country of heritage, such as Tonga, Fiji or Samoa.


https://www.smh.com.au/sport/nrl/v-...le-for-broadcast-dollars-20190915-p52rgu.html

"The NRL has to think differently and if you think about State of Origin, if you think about television audiences, the solution to me is to have another team in Brisbane.


"If you had a second Brisbane team it means that you have got a live game in Brisbane every week and with the focus of the AFL now on the northern states I think it is even more important that the NRL address this for the future success of the game."

https://www.smh.com.au/sport/nrl/wh...nrls-pay-tv-negotiations-20151016-gkapk2.html​

This from Brad Walter!

"Nine is known to be keen for another team to be based in Brisbane and there are a number of bids for new teams to play at Suncorp Stadium, while there is the possibility of Gold Coast Titans, who are owned by the NRL, or a Sydney club relocating."

https://www.smh.com.au/sport/nrl/a-...-the-new-television-deal-20150814-giz47c.html
​

Steve Renouf on David Gyngell's support of Brisbane 2.

"I remember David Gyngell when he was in charge at Channel Nine said an extra Brisbane team would add value to the broadcast rights.They were talking $30 million a year back then."

https://www.nrl.com/news/2018/03/08/why-ipswich-and-perth-should-get-nod-for-nrl-expansion/
​

What did Gyngell say, exactly?

“I am 100 per cent in favour of a second team in Brisbane,” Gyngell said.

“I support any moves the NRL makes on this because we have been pushing for it now for several years. It does nobody any favours only having the Broncos in Brisbane.

“Our return is 100 cents in the dollar with the Broncos and only 40 cents elsewhere. The Broncos would not have missed the eight this season if they’d had another team there.

“They need to compete and not be so complacent. We believe the market in Brisbane is more than ready for another team. My belief it that this is inevitable in the next few years.”

https://www.brisbanebombers.com.au/channel-nine-boss-wants-another-team-in-brisbane/​

 

[Get Rid of The Donkeys]

Not everyone thinks like you, champ.

Brisbane isn't that big of a RL city. The people of Brisbane have had a team in the national competition for over 30 years and a second team to follow only an hour away, if they can't bring themselves to go to Suncorp for whatever reason. Both fail to sell out games or even come close.

The Broncos average more to their games and draw higher TV ratings in Brisbane than any other professional sports club in Brisbane. If that ain't proof that Brisbane is a RL city, then what is?

No other RL club in the world averages as many fans through the gates as the Brisbane Broncos. RL is made for TV and is not as fun to watch at the ground. Unless you're high up in the stands, it is impossible to gauge the separation distance between players on the far side of the field. Plenty of RL fans choose watching the game on TV over going to the game for this reason.

You've been told why people don't like the Broncos. If you still don't get it then there's no point talking any further.

I went to a Broncos game once with a "Brisbane RL fan" and he asked me where Thurston was. Homie couldn't tell the difference between the Broncos and the QLD origin team.

Is there a point to this anecdote?

Broncos fans aren't loyal at all, there'd only be a minority that are. A lot of people prefer the Origin team. After what Greg Inglis did to the Broncos, his first game back everyone cheered him because he was a QLD player, they'd already forgotten he had backstabbed us.

Haven't I been saying all along that the Broncos are despised by a lot of RL fans in Brisbane?

What you've just written here proves it!

If you think a 2nd Brisbane team will all of a sudden get those same people to all jump ship to the new team and be super loyal for no reason to a team with no history, then I'm selling a bridge yada yada.

If it is a BRL club that's introduced as Brisbane 2 it will have history that dates back to when your grandfather was a young man.

Brisbane Broncos average 1995
35,902
South Queensland Crushers average 1995
21,029

https://afltables.com/rl/crowds/1995.html

So an average of 56,000 between the two teams went to QEII Stadium and Lang Park in 1995.

 

[The Great Dane]

TGD is an unstable troll. That's why I put him on ignore. He tries to present his opinions as "facts", and when people present evidence to prove he's wrong, he gets all petty and acts as if they've committed blasphemy. Other people have him on ignore, too. Muga B was the one who suggested I put TGD on ignore and I'm glad he did.

Pot, kettle, black, and you've never proved anybody wrong in your life.

BTW I still don't give a f**k what David Gyngell said almost a decade ago.

 

[pennywisealfie]

Yeah man, I'm not getting into this further when homie is making things up and saying Perth has no place as opposed to a FOURTH Brisbane team wtf.

I'm gonna go back to trolling the NRL forum.

 

[The Great Dane]

Pot, kettle, black, and you've never proved anybody wrong in your life.

BTW I still don't give a f**k what David Gyngell said almost a decade ago.

Actually you know what, I was wrong; GROTDs' doesn't present his opinions as fact, he presents other peoples opinions as fact.

 

[Perth Red]

Gygnell thought Brisbane 2 was so valuable to tv that he insisted on them being admitted when he was in charge of Ch9. Oh hang on......

 

[Get Rid of The Donkeys]

Yeah man, I'm not getting into this further when homie is making things up and saying Perth has no place as opposed to a FOURTH Brisbane team wtf.

I'm gonna go back to trolling the NRL forum.

Perth's best option is to strike a deal with one of the Sydney clubs.

A new team in Perth could work, but the odds of the other 16 clubs, QRL and NSWRL agreeing to it, which is what they will need to do to get the ARLC to give it the green light, is as likely as the Broncos making the top 8 this year. It will require an extra $13 million a year to cover the grant, and the broadcasters aren't going to throw that money at a Perth team because it will not generate the ratings they want. Without that extra $13 million, the only other option is lower the salary cap and grant. The RLPA and clubs are not going to accept less money to accommodate a Perth team just because TGD has deluded himself into thinking Perth is a necessity.

Brisbane 2 will bring money into the game. Ratings in Brisbane will be right up there with the other Queensland teams. Ch9 have already stated it will bring $30 million into the game. More than enough to cover the grant. 10 to 15 years after it has solidified itself in the Brisbane landscape would be the time to introduce Brisbane 3. NZ2 should come before Brisbane 3. NZ should have 3 teams.

 

[Perth Red]

one club wont bring any extra money into the game. If Brisbane2 was so valuable to TV they would have insisted on it in any of the last three TV deals. The only thing that adds value to NRL tv revenue is a ninth game to sell. 50k extra Brisbane viewers a week is not worth $30million a year lol.

 

[greenBV4]

one club wont bring any extra money into the game. If Brisbane2 was so valuable to TV they would have insisted on it in any of the last three TV deals. The only thing that adds value to NRL tv revenue is a ninth game to sell. 50k extra Brisbane viewers a week is not worth $30million a year lol.

yep bringing in Brisbane 2 ONLY essentially adds nothing but a game every week at Suncorp and a derby match once or twice a year, with a couple thousand new viewers. No new game, no new timeslot, and the introduction of a bye which could actually lower ratings/attendances some weeks (for example the week Broncos don't play could see a massive drop off in Brisbane)

Bringing in Bris2 and Perth gives all those positives but removes the negatives (an extra game, a new timeslot every other week and no bye), NZ2 the same but a new timelsot every week

IMO a bye should be avoided at all costs, it makes the compition even more unequal than it already is with a "half-ish" H/A schedule. Who gets the bye the week before finals? etc.

 

[Perth Red]

yep bringing in Brisbane 2 ONLY essentially adds nothing but a game every week at Suncorp and a derby match once or twice a year, .

Both big positives for the game and I dont think anyone thinks adding another club in Brisbane wont be a good long term outcome, AFL realised this 25 yers ago nce to see us wake up! But it is very poly-anna to think another Brisbane club is going to see any major boost in the tV deal. The fox deal is done and presumably doesn't include any extra $'s for a new club so its down to if FTA will pay more for it and like I said if they saw true value to them in it they would have been insisting on it for the last 15 years. They have had 3 chances to demand a second Brisbane club and have not, what does that tell you?

 

[Get Rid of The Donkeys]

yep bringing in Brisbane 2 ONLY essentially adds nothing but a game every week at Suncorp and a derby match once or twice a year, with a couple thousand new viewers. No new game, no new timeslot, and the introduction of a bye which could actually lower ratings/attendances some weeks (for example the week Broncos don't play could see a massive drop off in Brisbane)

Bringing in Bris2 and Perth gives all those positives but removes the negatives (an extra game, a new timeslot every other week and no bye), NZ2 the same but a new timelsot every week

IMO a bye should be avoided at all costs, it makes the compition even more unequal than it already is with a "half-ish" H/A schedule. Who gets the bye the week before finals? etc.

If the 18th licence was given to NZ2 then the 6pm (8pm NZST) Friday game could be played exclusively in NZ. That would be good for the Australian clubs, as it is hard to draw a crowd at that timeslot. Foxtel like the timeslot so it's not going anywhere. NZ2 could be the solution to this problem.

 

[The Great Dane]

If the 18th licence was given to NZ2 then the 6pm (8pm NZST) Friday game could be played exclusively in NZ. That would be good for the Australian clubs, as it is hard to draw a crowd at that timeslot. Foxtel like the timeslot so it's not going anywhere. NZ2 could be the solution to this problem.

Good for the Australian clubs, but terrible for the NZ clubs for the same reason.

Locking them into Friday night every week would basically be murdering the NZ clubs attendance, which would massively stunt one of their main income streams in a market that has already proven to be a volatile one for RL.
If the broadcasting deals (both AUS and NZ) are big enough to make it worth it then maybe it's worth doing, but I kind of doubt that they would be.

There also isn't a feasible bid from NZ, so NZ is a bit of a moot point until that changes.

 

[Perth Red]

Likewise a 6pm Sunday game is tailor made for a WA club.

 

[Get Rid of The Donkeys]

I'd like to congratulate Quidgybo for producing this excellent thread. He knows his stuff.

 

[titoelcolombiano]

If the 18th licence was given to NZ2 then the 6pm (8pm NZST) Friday game could be played exclusively in NZ. That would be good for the Australian clubs, as it is hard to draw a crowd at that timeslot. Foxtel like the timeslot so it's not going anywhere. NZ2 could be the solution to this problem.

This is a good point