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!

WA BEARS

Messages
6,018
That's not how that works lol.

The team maintains ownership of the branding, and there's no obligation for them to give it up.

In Cleveland's case Art Modell gave the city the Browns IP when he relocated the team to Baltimore under threat of legal action he wasn't confident of winning. In other words it was a compromise, he got to leave Cleveland without a shitfight that may have ended with him being forced to stay, and Cleveland got to keep the team's identity, facilities, and history.

I don't know much about the Supersonics case in particular, but I as far as I can tell OKC's owners (Professional Basketball Club LLC) still owns the Supersonics brand. So any new Seattle team will need a new brand unless they can come to an arrangement with OKC to use the Supersonics brand, which would probably cost a fortune.
Supersonics are a possibility.

"Fortunately, when the SuperSonics relocated to Oklahoma City, Clay Bennett agreed to leave the Supersonics name, logo and colors in Seattle for a possible future franchise in the city. Historical memorabilia including trophies, banners and retired jerseys also stayed in the city which are on display at the Museum of History & Industry."


Waiting for all of the crowd complaints over yesterdays Sydney games, and using them as reasons for cutting more Sydney teams
I can understand people not wanting to go out in the rain when flooding is a possibility. Especially during the coldest winter we've had in decades. It's a wonder anyone showed up at all.
 

Reflector

Juniors
Messages
1,702
It's the only one guaranteed to draw a big crowd and huge TV ratings regardless of when it's played or the form of the teams. It would be great if Sydney had something equal to it.
It helps when the Broncos are one of only two teams in SEQ while the Cowboys have the whole north of Qld to themselves- and their fans have made big road-trips to follow them since day 1, TBF.

Not sure if you've spent much time in Sydney or ever lived there, but to suggest that there's no other legitimate rivalry in the NRL is ridiculous. Roosters v Souths, Souths v Dragons, Eels v Bulldogs, Eels v Manly, Bulldogs v Dragons, Dragons v Sharks- these are all rivalries going back generations. And unlike the Broncos and the Cowboys (who are as far apart from each other geographically as the Broncos are from Melbourne) these are, for the most part, genuine local derbies. Broncos v Cowboys is a battle for Qld supremacy, largely the product of scarcity of NRL teams in Qld. The addition of the Dolphins (plus other bids in future) is going to ad an interesting dynamic to Qld NRL rivalries for this reason, especially in SEQ.

But tell the fans of any of those Sydney clubs that their games against (insert rival team) don't mean the same thing as the Broncos v Cowboys and they'd laugh- rightly so. The Broncos entering the NSWRL as a new, blank slate is completely different from getting two clubs like Norths and Manly- with over 50 years of mutual loathing- bringing them together and expecting it to work.
 
Messages
6,018
It helps when the Broncos are one of only two teams in SEQ while the Cowboys have the whole north of Qld to themselves- and their fans have made big road-trips to follow them since day 1, TBF.

Not sure if you've spent much time in Sydney or ever lived there, but to suggest that there's no other legitimate rivalry in the NRL is ridiculous. Roosters v Souths, Souths v Dragons, Eels v Bulldogs, Eels v Manly, Bulldogs v Dragons, Dragons v Sharks- these are all rivalries going back generations. And unlike the Broncos and the Cowboys (who are as far apart from each other geographically as the Broncos are from Melbourne) these are, for the most part, genuine local derbies. Broncos v Cowboys is a battle for Qld supremacy, largely the product of scarcity of NRL teams in Qld. The addition of the Dolphins (plus other bids in future) is going to ad an interesting dynamic to Qld NRL rivalries for this reason, especially in SEQ.

But tell the fans of any of those Sydney clubs that their games against (insert rival team) don't mean the same thing as the Broncos v Cowboys and they'd laugh- rightly so. The Broncos entering the NSWRL as a new, blank slate is completely different from getting two clubs like Norths and Manly- with over 50 years of mutual loathing- bringing them together and expecting it to work.
Sydney fans can laugh all they like. The thing they don't get is their tiny rivalries are meaningless because there's not enough fans to generate a significant profit to survive in a professional competition. There just aren't enough rugby league fans in Sydney to support nine professional rugby league clubs in a national competition. It's no longer the NSWRFL. What was acceptable in 1974 is out of date today.

The TV ratings and attendances for the Sydney teams are small. That makes them valueless to the broadcasters and sponsors as few people watch their games. It's the reason AwFuL continues to make more money from its sponsors and broadcast deals. That won't change until we cut the dead weight and bring in clubs that are able to generate the ratings and attendances that sponsors and broadcasters want.

We need to get rid of three Sydney clubs so the game can grow.

The fact these clubs have been around for generations but still have tiny fan bases means they're unfit to play in a national competition. If they were businesses in the free market without funds from a governing body then they would shrivel up and go bust.

What would happen if we took away the annual grant and gaming machines?

Most Sydney clubs would die because their tiny fan bases do not generate enough revenue from gate receipts and sponsorship deals to be financially viable.

The worst thing is Brisbane and New Zealand are under-represented and Adelaide and Perth have no representation because we have nine tiny parasitic Sydney clubs that contribute nothing to the game hogging valuable licences. Sydney RL fans overestimate the importance of their tiny and irrelevant clubs. Sydney's tiny clubs are a cancer and they're killing the game. The only way to beat cancer is to cut it out.
 
Last edited:

LeagueXIII

First Grade
Messages
5,735
Northern Beaches and North Shore are adjacent to one another. There is no reason one team cannot represent both regions. If RL fans from the North Shore want a team to support they can choose between Roosters and Sea Eagles. They do not need The Bears playing at NSO.
On paper it may seem logical like that but in reality it doesnt. So they just choose not to follow RL.
 

LeagueXIII

First Grade
Messages
5,735
Sydney fans can laugh all they like. The thing they don't get is their tiny rivalries are meaningless because there's not enough fans to generate a significant profit to survive in a professional competition. There just aren't enough rugby league fans in Sydney to support nine professional rugby league clubs in a national competition. It's no longer the NSWRFL. What was acceptable in 1974 is out of date today.

The TV ratings and attendances for the Sydney teams are small. That makes them valueless to the broadcasters and sponsors as few people watch their games. It's the reason AwFuL continues to make more money from its sponsors and broadcast deals. That won't change until we cut the dead weight and bring in clubs that are able to generate the ratings and attendances that sponsors and broadcasters want.

We need to get rid of three Sydney clubs so the game can grow.

The fact these clubs have been around for generations but still have tiny fan bases means they're unfit to play in a national competition. If they were businesses in the free market without funds from a governing body then they would shrivel up and go bust.

What would happen if we took away the annual grant and gaming machines?

Most Sydney clubs would die because their tiny fan bases do not generate enough revenue from gate receipts and sponsorship deals to be financially viable.

The worst thing is Brisbane and New Zealand are under-represented and Adelaide and Perth have no representation because we have nine tiny parasitic Sydney clubs that contribute nothing to the game hogging valuable licences. Sydney RL fans overestimate the importance of their tiny and irrelevant clubs. Sydney's tiny clubs are a cancer and they're killing the game. The only way to beat cancer is to cut it out.

Absolute nonsense....
 
Messages
6,018
Absolute nonsense....
Every major rugby league market in Australia and New Zealand was forced into abandoning their long-standing local competitions to field a team in the NSWRL. There's nothing special about Sydney that means it shouldn’t have to abide by the same rules they forced on everyone else. The sooky double standards NSWRL fans display is vomit inducing and very low brow.

If you think what I said is "absolute nonsense" then disprove it.

I can provide data on television ratings and attendances to support my position.

Can you?

If we're going by financials then are you able to name one Sydney club that is able to generate $25m pa from attendances, merchandise and sponsorship?

Without the $13m each Sydney club gets from the ARLC pa then they wouldn't be able to pay their players and cover the costs of running a football club. They're lucky to make $10m-$15m from attendances, merchandise and sponsorship. Most of the NSWRL clubs have been playing out of dilapidated grounds that are 50 to 75 years out of date, yet their fans like to think of themselves as being more sophisticated than everyone else. 😂
 

LeagueXIII

First Grade
Messages
5,735
Mate if you think a national comp could have come off the back of the local brissy comp you are dead set deluded. Most clubs struggled to pull 5k.
 

MugaB

First Grade
Messages
5,250
yawn, how about them WA Bears lol
Yes having a discussion with that brainless f**kwit will always end up sidelining every thread here on LU... seriously grotd can you just create a seperate fkn thread to spew your nonsense in, the constant derailing of this perth thread is bullshit
 
Messages
6,018
Mate if you think a national comp could have come off the back of the local brissy comp you are dead set deluded. Most clubs struggled to pull 5k.
I never said the BRL could have become a national competition. You're deflecting because you don't have an argument.

NSWRL clubs drew about 9k in 1987.


In 1988 the two biggest clubs were Newcastle and Brisbane.


After 34 years of an expanded NSWRL we still don't have a truly national competition. Every other competition has a team in Perth and all but Super Rugby have a team in Adelaide. It's a sad indictment on our game and its backwards administrators. The idiots who run our game and its Sydney-centric media did not even consider Perth as a possibility until some wanker tied it to a failed NSWRL club that haven't been in the NRL in 23 years. This is why our game lags behind instead of truly dominating.
 

The Great Dane

First Grade
Messages
5,634
Supersonics are a possibility.

"Fortunately, when the SuperSonics relocated to Oklahoma City, Clay Bennett agreed to leave the Supersonics name, logo and colors in Seattle for a possible future franchise in the city. Historical memorabilia including trophies, banners and retired jerseys also stayed in the city which are on display at the Museum of History & Industry."​
PBC were only contractual obliged to hand the Supersonics IP over to a new Seattle team under specific circumstances. As far as I can tell some of those circumstances still haven't been met, are contingent on the new team requesting the Supersonics IP with the intention of using it, and may have had a 5 year time limit, which would have lapsed 9 years ago.

In saying that, I haven't had a proper deep dive on the subject and what reporting there is on the subject is very confused. In other words everything I said could be totally wrong because nobody seems to agree on what is actually stated in the deal.

But one thing is for sure, PBC currently maintains ownership of the Supersonics IP, not the city of Seattle. So Clay Bennett didn't leave anything to anyone, simply agreed that the team wouldn't use it outside of Seattle and that he'd give it up for free under the right circumstances.
 

Vee

Bench
Messages
4,291
Yes having a discussion with that brainless f**kwit will always end up sidelining every thread here on LU... seriously grotd can you just create a seperate fkn thread to spew your nonsense in, the constant derailing of this perth thread is bullshit
Moderators?
 
Messages
6,018
PBC were only contractual obliged to hand the Supersonics IP over to a new Seattle team under specific circumstances. As far as I can tell some of those circumstances still haven't been met, are contingent on the new team requesting the Supersonics IP with the intention of using it, and may have had a 5 year time limit, which would have lapsed 9 years ago.

In saying that, I haven't had a proper deep dive on the subject and what reporting there is on the subject is very confused. In other words everything I said could be totally wrong because nobody seems to agree on what is actually stated in the deal.

But one thing is for sure, PBC currently maintains ownership of the Supersonics IP, not the city of Seattle. So Clay Bennett didn't leave anything to anyone, simply agreed that the team wouldn't use it outside of Seattle and that he'd give it up for free under the right circumstances.
I hope they come back at some stage. As a kid in the 90s who played a lot of Sonic the Hedgehog on Sega Megadrive I've always had a soft spot for them.
 

Reflector

Juniors
Messages
1,702
Sydney fans can laugh all they like. The thing they don't get is their tiny rivalries are meaningless because there's not enough fans to generate a significant profit to survive in a professional competition. There just aren't enough rugby league fans in Sydney to support nine professional rugby league clubs in a national competition. It's no longer the NSWRFL. What was acceptable in 1974 is out of date today.

The TV ratings and attendances for the Sydney teams are small. That makes them valueless to the broadcasters and sponsors as few people watch their games. It's the reason AwFuL continues to make more money from its sponsors and broadcast deals. That won't change until we cut the dead weight and bring in clubs that are able to generate the ratings and attendances that sponsors and broadcasters want.

We need to get rid of three Sydney clubs so the game can grow.

The fact these clubs have been around for generations but still have tiny fan bases means they're unfit to play in a national competition. If they were businesses in the free market without funds from a governing body then they would shrivel up and go bust.

What would happen if we took away the annual grant and gaming machines?

Most Sydney clubs would die because their tiny fan bases do not generate enough revenue from gate receipts and sponsorship deals to be financially viable.

The worst thing is Brisbane and New Zealand are under-represented and Adelaide and Perth have no representation because we have nine tiny parasitic Sydney clubs that contribute nothing to the game hogging valuable licences. Sydney RL fans overestimate the importance of their tiny and irrelevant clubs. Sydney's tiny clubs are a cancer and they're killing the game. The only way to beat cancer is to cut it out.
Ok, so for arguments' sake we cut 3 Sydney clubs.

Who are you cutting?

FTR I am pro expansion, but expanding the comp as a whole. Culling/ merging teams to achieve this "vision" is a terrible idea and we saw how well that did for the game in terms of support and attractiveness to sponsors 25 years ago...
 

mongoose

First Grade
Messages
9,210
Ok, so for arguments' sake we cut 3 Sydney clubs.

Who are you cutting?

FTR I am pro expansion, but expanding the comp as a whole. Culling/ merging teams to achieve this "vision" is a terrible idea and we saw how well that did for the game in terms of support and attractiveness to sponsors 25 years ago...
it's too late now... but they should have rationalised Sydney in the 90s. The SL war was the perfect opportunity to set the comp up for the long term but they stuffed it.

I think you would have ideally gone with:

1. Broncos
2. NQ Cowboys
3. Gold Coast
4. Brisbane 2 (whether its the crushers or someone else)

5-11 - 7 spots for Sydney/central coast/Wollongong clubs (I'm not going to specify which clubs)

12. Newcastle
13. Canberra
14. Melbourne
15. NZ Warriors
16. Perth

then sometime around 2010 we would have been looking at reintroducing Adelaide and maybe NZ2 and move to 18 teams
 
Top