Wellington launch NRL bid!!

[pHyR3]

just fyi, havent checked the rest but i know Isaac Luke is from Taranaki, not wellington.

Somewhat close but definitely not the same

 

[oikee]

so why wellington over christchurch??? i think it would be good to have an nrl club on the south island. the christchurch club could look after rugby league on the south island and maybe play some games in other towns on the south island, and nz (name change back to auckland) warriors to do the same with the north island. would make a good rivalry. north v south. . .

You really want to know why the NRL should not put a team in Wellington or the south island. ?
Because if they do, the code will be making nothing but the same old mistakes it has made for the last 100 years.
Look, the only place the NRL should place a second team is in Auckland. This will create massive derbies by fans in the one city.
Example. Manchester united verse Manchester City.
HullFC verse HullKR
Collingwood Verse Richmond.
Bulldogs verse Parra

Brisbane Broncos Verse Brisbane Brothers??? should have had a second Brisbane team 30 years ago
Same as Auckland. To place a team in Wellington or South Island will only make the same mistake Queensland made with Cows and Titans.
Good derbies but not world-class derbies as in the above examples.
Auckland is the place for a second team. They have the most sponsors, the most supporters and the best rivalry. They just dont realise it yet.

 

[pHyR3]

Brisbane brothers works because brisbane is a rugby league city and theres resentment for SL and the broncos' on field successes.

Auckland 2 will fail just like GWS Giants. Wellington or Southern Orcas works far better. Captures a relatively untapped market, more games can be played there, more community/school work possible etc.

 

[alien]

You really want to know why the NRL should not put a team in Wellington or the south island. ?
Because if they do, the code will be making nothing but the same old mistakes it has made for the last 100 years.
Look, the only place the NRL should place a second team is in Auckland. This will create massive derbies by fans in the one city.
Example. Manchester united verse Manchester City.
HullFC verse HullKR
Collingwood Verse Richmond.
Bulldogs verse Parra

Brisbane Broncos Verse Brisbane Brothers??? should have had a second Brisbane team 30 years ago
Same as Auckland. To place a team in Wellington or South Island will only make the same mistake Queensland made with Cows and Titans.
Good derbies but not world-class derbies as in the above examples.
Auckland is the place for a second team. They have the most sponsors, the most supporters and the best rivalry. They just dont realise it yet.

i disagree. going by your logic there should be a 2nd melbourne team, and that would be stupid

 

[oikee]

i disagree. going by your logic there should be a 2nd melbourne team, and that would be stupid

Haha,
Yes, going by my logic there would be a second Melbourne team.

And i also think you are pretty intelligent.

Melbourne will one day have to have a second team.
I mean to say, if this city hits 7 million people, not having a second team would be criminal..

The AFL has two teams in nearly every city, except for Brisbane.

The NRL really has to have a second team in Brisbane. That will help the NRL become the top sporting code in the country.

 

[oikee]

Brisbane brothers works because brisbane is a rugby league city and theres resentment for SL and the broncos' on field successes.

Auckland 2 will fail just like GWS Giants. Wellington or Southern Orcas works far better. Captures a relatively untapped market, more games can be played there, more community/school work possible etc.

Brisbane is a no-brainer, Auckland two needs to happen, and Melbourne will have a second team.
You have to create massive derbies. It is the way of the world, the best derbies in world sport, denying that is denying your future.

 

[LeagueXIII]

Brisbane brothers works because brisbane is a rugby league city and theres resentment for SL and the broncos' on field successes.

.

They did have a second Brisbane team 30 years ago, and a Perth team infact.........and then came super league we know the rest after that..........

 

[LeagueXIII]

Brisbane brothers works because brisbane is a rugby league city and theres resentment for SL and the broncos' on field successes.

.

They did have a second Brisbane team 30 years ago, and a Perth team infact.........and then came super league we know the rest after that..........

 

[alien]

They did have a second Brisbane team 30 years ago, and a Perth team infact.........and then came super league we know the rest after that..........

It wasn't 30 years ago.

 

[alien]

Haha,
Yes, going by my logic there would be a second Melbourne team.

And i also think you are pretty intelligent.

Melbourne will one day have to have a second team.
I mean to say, if this city hits 7 million people, not having a second team would be criminal..

The AFL has two teams in nearly every city, except for Brisbane.

The NRL really has to have a second team in Brisbane. That will help the NRL become the top sporting code in the country.

I agree there should be a second team in Brisbane, but imo there should be a team in Perth, Christchurch, Central Coast and Adelaide before they think about putting a second team in Melbourne. It is good to have derbies, but in a city like Melbourne where Rugby League isn't that popular, I don't think 2 teams is the way to go before other cities that should have a team first. In the future maybe, but not in the short-term.

 

[alien]

Hey oikee, if Melbourne do get a second team one day, then I think it should be the Jets (as in Newtown). I always thought it should have been them who relocated to Melbourne, instead of making a completely new team (Storm).

 

[The Great Dane]

Brisbane is a no-brainer, Auckland two needs to happen, and Melbourne will have a second team.
You have to create massive derbies. It is the way of the world, the best derbies in world sport, denying that is denying your future.

Any talk of either Auckland or Melbourne being able to support second clubs within the next 10-15 is fanciful at best.

Their simply isn't enough support for RL in these cities to support two teams yet (and their may never be), so adding second clubs in these cities at the moment would only be spliting the existing support (at every level) between the clubs thus making 2 weak clubs in each city instead of one strong one.

 

[The Great Dane]

Hey oikee, if Melbourne do get a second team one day, then I think it should be the Jets (as in Newtown). I always thought it should have been them who relocated to Melbourne, instead of making a completely new team (Storm).

Why?

I doubt that the Newtown brand would carry much (if any) weight in Melbourne.

If you wanted to get Newtown re-involved then it'd make more sense to try to get them to hookup with Ipswich and the Western Corridor bid wouldn't it.

But honestly I don't think that it'd be worth the time and effort.

 

[alien]

Why?

I doubt that the Newtown brand would carry much (if any) weight in Melbourne.

If you wanted to get Newtown re-involved then it'd make more sense to try to get them to hookup with Ipswich and the Western Corridor bid wouldn't it.

But honestly I don't think that it'd be worth the time and effort.

just to continue a brand that already means something to some people. could work for a western brisbane team too

 

[Perth Red]

Outside of a very few 50 plus year olds in sydney the jets brand means nothing. In fact nationally the NY Jets would probably be more well known than some long defunct top tier rl club.

 

[oikee]

just to continue a brand that already means something to some people. could work for a western brisbane team too

Melbourne Jets,,, sounds good to me. Maybe a slightly longer tital, ? Melbourne international Jets. Melbourne Jet-fighters. Jet-launchers.
I dont know, i like the idea.
Talking about bringing back old clubs, the Brisbane rugby league, BRL, have just announced they are re-entering the Valley's and Wests clubs next year. Diehards(valleys) and the Panthers(wests).
So bringing back old teams seems to be worth the effort.
Ipswich are also called the Ipswich Jets.
They are next to the Airforce base.

I like the idea of having Wellington as the new NZ team. When that goes pair-shaped, (if it goes pair-shaped) then move the team to Auckland.
Auckland will hopefully have a new stadium by then and be ready for a second team.
If Wellington survives, all is well and good.

 

[alien]

Outside of a very few 50 plus year olds in sydney the jets brand means nothing. In fact nationally the NY Jets would probably be more well known than some long defunct top tier rl club.

and "storm" would have meant nothing to anyone before they decided on a club name, and it would have been keeping alive a bit of tradition, but the nrl doesnt care about that unless they can make a buck from it, eg marketing

 

[The Great Dane]

and "storm" would have meant nothing to anyone before they decided on a club name, and it would have been keeping alive a bit of tradition, but the nrl doesnt care about that unless they can make a buck from it, eg marketing

You can whinge about it all you like but the whole point of the NRL is to "make a buck"!

The only defunct brand (in the NRL) that anyone could say is worth the risk of bringing back outside of it's original region with any confidence is the Bears and that's very rapidly changing.

But in the unlikely case that there's ever talk of another Sydney club bringing back one of old brands would be a very good marketing ploy, but if I was doing it I'd go with a brand that is older, unique, a bit more easily mythicized and not already owned by another club currently still in business, I'd probably go with the Dirty Reds personally.

 

[oikee]

You can whinge about it all you like but the whole point of the NRL is to "make a buck"!

The only defunct brand (in the NRL) that anyone could say is worth the risk of bringing back outside of it's original region with any confidence is the Bears and that's very rapidly changing.

But in the unlikely case that there's ever talk of another Sydney club bringing back one of old brands would be a very good marketing ploy, but if I was doing it I'd go with a brand that is older, unique, a bit more easily mythicized and not already owned by another club currently still in business, I'd probably go with the Dirty Reds personally.

Yes, the Bears are a very strong brand.
I mean all the mums and kids love bears. So you have a complete market right their, straight off you gain massive support.
Same as the Brothers brand here in QLD.
It is a old traditional brand that everyone loves, as is the Valley Diehards.

 

[alien]

The only defunct brand (in the NRL) that anyone could say is worth the risk of bringing back outside of it's original region with any confidence is the Bears and that's very rapidly changing.

No that's your opinion. Don't assume everyone thinks like you.