Where is the push for a 2nd Brisbane team?

[bfoord]

My Thoughts on a second Brisbane team:

- I think it would struggle to gain crowds while being indirect competition with the Broncos. (remember what happened with the Crushers. they couldn't compete with the Broncos crowd wise so they ended up letting in people for free to get the numbers. then most of those people barracked for the opposition.:lol

- Also the Broncos used to have a clause in their contract with the NRL that a second Brisbane team is not permitted for a certain period of time (and i don't think that has come yet)

- We also don't want to do to Brisbane what has be done to Sydney and that is saturated the city with teams, so all of the teams in the city have their crowds diluted to the point where they are struggling.

- personally, i think the number of teams in Sydney should be reduced to 4 (playing out of the upgraded suburban grounds) having the teams as: Brisbane Broncos, Gold Coast Titans, Nth QLD Cowboys, NZ Warriors, Newcastle Knight, Canberra Raiders, Melbourne Storm, Central Coast, Perth, Adelaide, 4 Sydney teams making it a 14 team comp.

 

[Loudstrat]

2 points to that, bfoord.

1) The Crushers suffered because they were on the ARL side of the SL war - and the morons from north backed the rebels to the hilt, because they were excited at the prospect of only having 3 teams from Sydney. When they saw that Manly, Saints, Parra, Tigers and Easts were still playing, but just didn't go to play the Broncos any more, their went SL's viability.
2) How did we 'let' Sydney have 9 teams? Well, maybe because we had 8 in 1908, 10 in 1947, and 12 in 1967...........

Chop'em all of except 4, and you have SL again. With no ARL to bail 'em out when it collapses.

One important point you Sydney decimators ignore is that when the SL split happened - no fan of an ARL club adopted a team in SL - and vice versa. You didn't have any "I support the Knights and Mariners" people. You had plenty of "I support the Knights and piss on the Mariners" people though.

 

[Non Terminator]

personally, i think the number of teams in Sydney should be reduced to 4 (playing out of the upgraded suburban grounds) having the teams as: Brisbane Broncos, Gold Coast Titans, Nth QLD Cowboys, NZ Warriors, Newcastle Knight, Canberra Raiders, Melbourne Storm, Central Coast, Perth, Adelaide, 4 Sydney teams making it a 14 team comp.

God not this again. :lol:
THAT WON'T WORK!

 

[Iafeta]

The point of including them in the argument was to highlight the fact that even though FOR THEIR FIRST SEASON they regularly attracted crowds in excess of 20K at a run down Lang Park in need of serious upgrade, the broncos continued to also attract crowds of 30K plus cracked 40K regularly.

The point is - They did not erode none of the broncos supporter base. At all. And the one game between them attracted 49K to ANZ Stadium.

You know, I could probably go back to a year or two before the Great Depression hit the States and give you figures about economic prosperity and growth. But that would be out of context. You took a set of figures that served you well, ignoring others that wipe you off the floor, and then when those figures are provided you choose to label it a bad example when the figures initially provided - out of context - were a fine example to start off with.

You made no point whatsoever, the only thing we can deduce Crushers crowds were abysmal over their tenure. Hardly something to put in your application to the NRL for a new team.

 

[_Johnsy]

I understand the broncs fans reluctance to have a 2nd side, it will jeopardise their monopoly of more than 1.8 million people. Of course we cant expect the RL centre of the universe, Brisbane to be willing to have a 2nd NRL team.

 

[Frank_Grimes]

2. The distance between Gold Coast and Brisbane is GREATER then Central Coast and Sydney.

40 minutes out of Sydney is considered the Central Coast?

 

[bobmar28]

My Thoughts on a second Brisbane team:

- I think it would struggle to gain crowds while being indirect competition with the Broncos. (remember what happened with the Crushers. they couldn't compete with the Broncos crowd wise so they ended up letting in people for free to get the numbers. then most of those people barracked for the opposition.:lol

- Also the Broncos used to have a clause in their contract with the NRL that a second Brisbane team is not permitted for a certain period of time (and i don't think that has come yet)

- We also don't want to do to Brisbane what has be done to Sydney and that is saturated the city with teams, so all of the teams in the city have their crowds diluted to the point where they are struggling.

- personally, i think the number of teams in Sydney should be reduced to 4 (playing out of the upgraded suburban grounds) having the teams as: Brisbane Broncos, Gold Coast Titans, Nth QLD Cowboys, NZ Warriors, Newcastle Knight, Canberra Raiders, Melbourne Storm, Central Coast, Perth, Adelaide, 4 Sydney teams making it a 14 team comp.

4 Sydney teams... North, East, West and Southwest.

 

[Tidus_Raider]

You know, I could probably go back to a year or two before the Great Depression hit the States and give you figures about economic prosperity and growth. But that would be out of context. You took a set of figures that served you well, ignoring others that wipe you off the floor, and then when those figures are provided you choose to label it a bad example when the figures initially provided - out of context - were a fine example to start off with.

You made no point whatsoever, the only thing we can deduce Crushers crowds were abysmal over their tenure. Hardly something to put in your application to the NRL for a new team.

If you read my posts you would clearly get the 'point' of my argument regarding crowd figures. Did you get my point? Or do you want to debate about the Great Depression.

You said no one is doubting the sustainability of a second Brisbane team yet after your post at least 2 others have suggested Brisbane can't maintain 2 viable sides in the comp.

The Crushers were a dismal failure, HOWEVER in their first year they pulled crowds. Big crowds. So did Brisbane. In there 2nd year they didn't. This didn't mean the Bronco's crowds suddenly increased because the people that went to the Crushers games in 1995 jumped ship and returned to the Bronocs bandwagon in 1996.

That one year in 1995 showed that 2 teams from Brisbane can both pull big crowds weekly without affecting the other. The demise of the Crushers is a totally different argument.

 

[East Coast Tiger]

How could a second team possibly weaken the Bronco's? Competition breeds success. Plus 2 teams means more fans, more publicity, more coverage. Imagine the intense rivalry after 5 years. 10 years. You have 2 guaranteed sell out matches every year at Suncorp.

Did Fremantle hurt West Coast Eagles? Did Port Adelaide hurt Adelaide?

How is it that the AFL is planning on expanding AFL into Western Sydney, Rugby League HEARTLAND, and thus having two teams in a Rugby League city yet fans seem to think that having a second team in Brisbane, arguably the rugby league capital of australia is such a ridiculous idea?

By this more the merrier approach it would also make sense to have more teams in Sydney and we know how ludicrous that would be. Simply saying that competition breeds success as if it is a certainty in every situation is just silly. And just because the morons at the AFL want to waste millions of dollars in Sydney doesn't mean it's a good idea.

 

[Tidus_Raider]

By this more the merrier approach it would also make sense to have more teams in Sydney and we know how ludicrous that would be. Simply saying that competition breeds success as if it is a certainty in every situation is just silly. And just because the morons at the AFL want to waste millions of dollars in Sydney doesn't mean it's a good idea.

Who brought Sydney into the argument. If Sydney had 1 team in the comp, I would of started a thread titled 'Where is the push for a 2nd Sydney team?'. The fact is there are 9 teams in Sydney, 2 of them are merged that include two sets of fans, and one was thrown out of the comp and only recently started finding its feet again. They are also operating at huge lossses, struggling to attract sponsors, have low memberships and crowd figures which in some cases are embarrassing considering the club is over 100 years old.

Also, Sydney is quite possibly the most competitive sporting market place in the world. We have the Afl and the Swans, A-League and Sydney FC with another team on the way, Unionwith the Waratahs, theres Basketball, netball (pulls big crowds) and loads of other things to do also. The market place is crowded.

Brisbane does not have this problem. Yes they have competition from other codes but RL is by far and away the most dominant sport.

 

[Tidus_Raider]

I don't usually agree with Phil Gould on issues but here's an article he wrote a few months back:

http://www.leaguehq.com.au/news/news/brisbane-holds-the-key/2008/08/23/1219262611519.html

It's high time the NRL delivered us a definitive plan regarding the introduction of a second team in the Brisbane area.
There are many things to be addressed in our game with the administration structure, revenue, finances, salary caps, rules and match scheduling, just to name a few.


In the meantime, though, it is imperative that the NRL has a third team playing out of the south-east Queensland region well before the TV and pay TV broadcasting rights are up for renegotiation in 2012.
Brisbane is the capital of rugby league these days. The way Queensland fans regularly support the big games up there puts some of their southern rivals to shame.


Look at Friday night's crowds. A paltry crowd of 10,013 turned out to watch the third-placed Sharks play the fourth-placed Roosters. At Suncorp Stadium in Brisbane on the same night, just on 40,000 people attended the match between the fifth-placed Broncos and the 13th-placed Gold Coast Titans.Granted it was a miserable night in Sydney and much easier to stay at home and watch the game on TV; but with so much night football played in Sydney in the colder winter months, this is a problem plaguing all clubs in the metropolitan area as they try different ways to raise gate revenue.Let me tell you, it rained all day in Brisbane too before Friday night's game, but this didn't deter fans from getting out to watch the game live.


It supports my belief that more Sydney games need to be scheduled for Sunday afternoons to help attract people through the gates. Night time is killing crowds and the cold, wet and heavy dews are also affecting the quality of football being played.The Queensland teams have such a weather advantage when it comes to attracting fans to winter games.
Average crowd figures over the past four years also dispel the argument that more teams in south-east Queensland would harm the crowds the Broncos have previously enjoyed with their regional monopoly.
In 2005 Brisbane averaged 30,328 per game for home crowds. In 2006 this figure raised slightly to 31,208.


The Gold Coast Titans entered the competition in 2007 despite protests from the Brisbane team that their introduction would dilute support at games. The Titans averaged 21,489 at home games in 2007 and have averaged 21,700 so far in this season. At the same time, average Broncos crowds increased to 32,873 in 2007 and 33,041 so far in 2008.The introduction of the Titans has actually led to an increase in crowds for the Broncos. I contend that a second Brisbane team would also lead to further increases.


In the AFL, the Adelaide Crows pleaded for years that their city was not big enough for two teams and fought to maintain their monopoly.
After Port Adelaide came in, the Crows' membership base nearly doubled and you can't get a ticket to the local derby a year out.
You can feel the buzz in Brisbane about rugby league every time you walk down the street. People pull you up all the time just wanting to talk about the game. Not all of them are Bronco supporters; but they are all rugby league fans.


Look at the huge advantage the Gold Coast and Brisbane have over the clubs in Sydney regarding the ability to attract crowds and the money they make from corporate hospitality in their magnificent purpose-built stadiums. As time passes, the gap between their finances and those of the struggling Sydney teams will only grow. Having four (or even five) Queensland teams will give that State plenty of local derbies that will attract huge crowds. These games could be scheduled at night in the warmer Queensland winter months, leaving more daylight timeslots for Sydney teams to boost their crowds. It will also make our game more valuable to TV and pay TV which ultimately benefits all NRL teams.


The expansion of our game will also help it retain more players..
I feel sick that the likes of Brett Hodgson, Steve Menzies and Danny Buderus have seemingly been shunted from our game late in their careers simply because of restrictive salary-cap pressure.

 

[In-goal]

Mate - I have nothing against you personally, but this idea is so UNBELIEVABLY F*CKING STUPID it beggars belief.

Only East Coast Tiger seems to understand this! Brisbane gets massive crowds because the WHOLE CITY supports it. Anyone who doesn't like the Broncos goes for either the Titans or the Cowboys (like me). If you put another Brisbane team in, you're not going to get ANY extra fans, you're just going to increase costs. This is the dumbest idea since the Mitsubishi 380.

Central Coast is not such a stupid idea because it is a large enough community and it is far enough away from any other teams to justify expansion.

Perth is a great idea. Wellington is a fantastic idea. For f*cks sake, Suva or Port Moresby would be better places to expand.

Seriously - does the NRL push for another team in Sydney? Does the AFL push for another Melbourne team? Expansion means taking the game OUT of the heartland and into new areas.

Go and bang your head against the wall 100 times. Like I said, nothing personal, but every time someone suggests it I can feel my brain melting again.

What about Perth when the AFL introduced the Fremantle Dockers? Many, many supporters left the eagles especialy from around the Fremantle region. Funnily enough they both play at the same stadium and they have both assissted in growing the AFL brand in the state of W.A.

A second Brisbane team is a must, it just makes sense. The Central Coast makes no sense unless a Sydney club falls over.

 

[bobbis]

People who think a 2nd Brisbane side will cannablise the Broncos market are fooling themselves.

Have a look at the West Coast Fremantle crowds after fremantle was introduced in 1995:

1994 West Coast 27,450
1995 Fremantle 23,361 West Coast 32,120
1996 Fremantle 22,473 West Coast 32,448
1997 Fremantle 21,982 West Coast 32,582
2008 Fremantle 35,877 West Coast 37,653

Then there's the Adelaide example:
1996 Adelaide 39,428
1997 Adelaide 40,173 Port Adelaide 35,829
1998 Adelaide 41,245 Port Adelaide 31,799
1999 Adelaide 39,393 Port Adelaide 31,269
2008 Adelaide 40,678 Port Adelaide 23,842

In neither case is there any evidence that the 2nd team negatively impacted the original team's crowds.

Brisbane can sustain another team, if you look at Broncos crowds they're between Adelaide and West Coast crowds pre expansion so the examples are quite similar. Brisbane wouldn't be over crowded, from a population point of view a 2nd Brisbane team would divide a city of 1,857,594 in half or about 900 000 each. Thats a bigger catchment area than every team in the NRL other than the Warriors and Melbourne, both of which where rugby league isn't the doiminant sport. Sydney teams have about 480 000 people per team, Newcastle 530 000 Gold Coast 580 000. Crucially not all Brisbane rugby league fans are Broncos fans, many hate the club with a passion.

Thats not to say a Brisbane team should be the 1st cab off the ranks, but from a viability point of view there's no reason a 2nd Brisbane team can't work.

 

[Lockyer4President!]

People who think a 2nd Brisbane side will cannablise the Broncos market are fooling themselves.

Have a look at the West Coast Fremantle crowds after fremantle was introduced in 1995:

1994 West Coast 27,450
1995 Fremantle 23,361 West Coast 32,120
1996 Fremantle 22,473 West Coast 32,448
1997 Fremantle 21,982 West Coast 32,582
2008 Fremantle 35,877 West Coast 37,653

Then there's the Adelaide example:
1996 Adelaide 39,428
1997 Adelaide 40,173 Port Adelaide 35,829
1998 Adelaide 41,245 Port Adelaide 31,799
1999 Adelaide 39,393 Port Adelaide 31,269
2008 Adelaide 40,678 Port Adelaide 23,842

In neither case is there any evidence that the 2nd team negatively impacted the original team's crowds.

Brisbane can sustain another team, if you look at Broncos crowds they're between Adelaide and West Coast crowds pre expansion so the examples are quite similar. Brisbane wouldn't be over crowded, from a population point of view a 2nd Brisbane team would divide a city of 1,857,594 in half or about 900 000 each. Thats a bigger catchment area than every team in the NRL other than the Warriors and Melbourne, both of which where rugby league isn't the doiminant sport. Sydney teams have about 480 000 people per team, Newcastle 530 000 Gold Coast 580 000. Crucially not all Brisbane rugby league fans are Broncos fans, many hate the club with a passion.

Thats not to say a Brisbane team should be the 1st cab off the ranks, but from a viability point of view there's no reason a 2nd Brisbane team can't work.

Crowds for Brisbane and the Gold Coast have both increased since the GC's reintroduction in 2007. TR was also saying the same thing but using the Crushers first season as his example.

 

[Iafeta]

If you read my posts you would clearly get the 'point' of my argument regarding crowd figures. Did you get my point? Or do you want to debate about the Great Depression.

You said no one is doubting the sustainability of a second Brisbane team yet after your post at least 2 others have suggested Brisbane can't maintain 2 viable sides in the comp.

The Crushers were a dismal failure, HOWEVER in their first year they pulled crowds. Big crowds. So did Brisbane. In there 2nd year they didn't. This didn't mean the Bronco's crowds suddenly increased because the people that went to the Crushers games in 1995 jumped ship and returned to the Bronocs bandwagon in 1996.

That one year in 1995 showed that 2 teams from Brisbane can both pull big crowds weekly without affecting the other. The demise of the Crushers is a totally different argument.

Wrong. I never said anything Brisbane's ability or inability to sustain a second team whatsoever. My comment is merely a probe into your statistics, showing you bent them to prove your theory without allowing context to show the true picture. I don't have a view either way.

The Great Depression is an analogy. You can extrapolate any figures you want, you can bend statistics in many different ways to prove your view. But the way you did it was nonsensical at best. You talked of the Crushers crowds in year 1 as being a good example to back up your argument, but in 1996-1997 their crowd figures slipped dramatically and you chose not to include those figures. Drawing inference from one year alone will cause any number of statistical distortions.

 

[Perth Red]

Brisbane could sustain another team, no doubts. Personally I think we need to expand the game and show some b0llx to tackle other codes in major cities where we don't have teams.

2012 Perth and CC
2016 SC Crusaders playing out of Suncorp and either Wellington or Adelaide

If any Sydney teams fall over we could look at the Brisbane option sooner

SL in the UK is showing us the way to do it with one heartland and one expansion at a time.

We are supposed to be a major sporting code in this country yet we have so little confidence in ourselves that we don't think we can go where the AFL, S14, Soccer, Basketball, Baseball, Netball, Water Polo have managed to expand succesfully?

 

[Lockyer4President!]

2016 SC Crusaders playing out of Suncorp

SC = Sunshine Coast? And you want them playing out of Brisbane?
Methinks you need to check out a map.

 

[Perth Red]

yeh geography never was a strong point!

Whatever they are called they need a distinctly different identity and demographic to teh Broncos but need to play out of Suncorp. Tjhat is probably the trickiest thing about introducing a 2nd Brisbane team. Alos I haven't actually seen any group putting their hand up to develop a bid so it may all just be wishful thinking anyway. Only Bears, Reds and PNG have gone on record as saying they will be ready to bid when the opportunity arises.

 

[Tidus_Raider]

Wrong. I never said anything Brisbane's ability or inability to sustain a second team whatsoever. My comment is merely a probe into your statistics, showing you bent them to prove your theory without allowing context to show the true picture. I don't have a view either way.

The Great Depression is an analogy. You can extrapolate any figures you want, you can bend statistics in many different ways to prove your view. But the way you did it was nonsensical at best. You talked of the Crushers crowds in year 1 as being a good example to back up your argument, but in 1996-1997 their crowd figures slipped dramatically and you chose not to include those figures. Drawing inference from one year alone will cause any number of statistical distortions.

*Sigh*

You still don't get it do you. The crowd statistics of 1995 (the year I referenced) was to highlight the bronco's crowds increase even in the midst of a new team in their city. The fact that their crowds increased in the next two years strengthens my argument. This is not about the Crushers crowds. Do you get that? Do you understand why 1996 and 1997 are of no use to me? This is about the BRONCOS and them being able to still pull crowds even with a 2nd Brisbane team also getting 20K plus to their games.


As everyone with an inkling of knowledge about the SL war knows the Crushers were fighting a battle to stay in the comp from day one. Mixed that with their on field woes and it was a recipe for disaster. The fans deserted them.

 

[Iafeta]

Oh I see, the fans deserted them. And that makes all the difference to discuss their merits on crowd numbers to persuade for a second Brisbane side?

If you had have used combined figures, you may have been ok. The fact though you chose to use South Queensland's first year and not their other years where their crowds fell alarmingly is humorous at best.