Where is the push for a 2nd Brisbane team?

[Tidus_Raider]

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.

If Melbourne was bottom of the ladder, regularly got thrashed and was playing with the knowledge that the club was on the chopping block and would not be competing next year how many people would turn up to their games? Knowing that in 6 months time the club would cease to exist.

 

[Loudstrat]

My point exactly. It was a very poor example of you to use. You decided to use the 1995 season, deceptively and out of context, I've merely expanded on their entire history to put your example into context for what it was, a poor example.

1996 was a terrible example, because the conditions were unique. Queenslanders hated the ARL due to Brisbane's influence in Super League. That's why the Crushers died

Question: Who the fudge would support this team ?

The Broncos are already there, & the Queensland RL fans who don't like them would either support a team out of state or got swept up by Cowboys & Titans.

Brisbaneites would support the 3rd most furthest team away from them?

 

[East Coast Tiger]

Brisbaneites would support the 3rd most furthest team away from them?

Yep. It's in Qld don't you know. Since the Cowboys have come good the number of Cowboys fans in Brisbane seems to have exploded. You never used to see anyone in a jersey or shirt except if you went to a Broncos/Cowboys game and there'd be only a few. Now you see people in Cowboys gear all the time and when they play in Brisbane there's not only a much bigger crowd generally but a lot more people supporting the Cows. Queenslanders will generally always support a Qld team over a NSW team even if it's not their own team as such. The funny thing about Qld is that they turn up in huge numbers for local derbies against other Qld sides yet unlike most local derbies they actually like their rivals and would generally adopt them as their second team.

 

[Tidus_Raider]

Yep. It's in Qld don't you know. Since the Cowboys have come good the number of Cowboys fans in Brisbane seems to have exploded. You never used to see anyone in a jersey or shirt except if you went to a Broncos/Cowboys game and there'd be only a few. Now you see people in Cowboys gear all the time and when they play in Brisbane there's not only a much bigger crowd generally but a lot more people supporting the Cows. Queenslanders will generally always support a Qld team over a NSW team even if it's not their own team as such. The funny thing about Qld is that they turn up in huge numbers for local derbies against other Qld sides yet unlike most local derbies they actually like their rivals and would generally adopt them as their second team.

Even more reason to expand a 2nd team into Brisbane. Surely these 'Queenslanders who support a QLD team over a NSW team' would 'turn up in huge numbers for local derbies' would get behind a second Brisbane team based out of the North or West.

Somehow I think more people in brisbane would follow a team from their own city (non-broncos supporters that is) then one based in townsville.

 

[East Coast Tiger]

Even more reason to expand a 2nd team into Brisbane. Surely these 'Queenslanders who support a QLD team over a NSW team' would 'turn up in huge numbers for local derbies' would get behind a second Brisbane team based out of the North or West.

Somehow I think more people in brisbane would follow a team from their own city (non-broncos supporters that is) then one based in townsville.

Didn't you read what I wrote. These people already follow a club - the Broncos or Cowboys. And once again we have some idiot trying to put this mythical second club into a particular part of the city as if it's a matter of just plonking a club down and expecting that it will suddenly represent that area, even if there is no infrastructure or latent RL support base there for them to take advantage of. And all costing the game $2.5m a year while competing for limited corporate dollars, juniors and fans in a market that we already dominate while elsewhere there is a new and untapped market that misses out altogether.

 

[Tidus_Raider]

Didn't you read what I wrote. These people already follow a club - the Broncos or Cowboys.

They follow the Cowboys because they a) don't like the bronco's and b) are a Queensland side. You think these people would still follow the cowboys if they had another local team to support. Some might, but the majority?

And once again we have some idiot

Don't make this personal and don't insult my intelligence by calling me an idiot. How old are you?

it's a matter of just plonking a club down and expecting that it will suddenly represent that area, even if there is no infrastructure or latent RL support base there for them to take advantage of.

Um, did we not just 'plonk' the Cowboys? Titans? Storm. Have they not succeeded by suddenly representing there area with no infrastructure, support base or juniors?

The only other national league to do this was the AFL. And look what a raging success the Fremantle Dockers and Port Adelaide Power have been.

And all costing the game $2.5m a year while competing for limited corporate dollars, juniors and fans in a market that we already dominate

Juniors is not a problem. How many Queenslanders are playing for NSW clubs. How many are playing in the ESL? A second Brisbane team would generate the code money. The more powerful clubs, the healthier the bottom dollar. Do you really think its fair that Brisbane should only have ONE CLUB for the ENTIRE city whereas Sydney has 9? Do you not think that Brisbane has showed in the last decade at least that its a RL city with enormous potential still that hasn't been tapped? Why all the internationals and Test matches? Why is there talk aboutmoving the Grand Final?

while elsewhere there is a new and untapped market that misses out altogether.

Like where? Perth? Wellington? Its not ok to 'plonk' a 2nd team into Brisbane, Rugby League heartland and stronghold but its ok for Perth? Where is their junior base? Infrastructure? How many corporate dollars are left with West Coast, fremantle, Perth Glory and Western Force there? if anything Brisbane is the safer hand, its Perth thats the gamble.

And let me just say that i'm not against a Perth side, just not one in place of Brisbane or Central Coast.

 

[bobbis]

Didn't you read what I wrote. These people already follow a club - the Broncos or Cowboys. And once again we have some idiot trying to put this mythical second club into a particular part of the city as if it's a matter of just plonking a club down and expecting that it will suddenly represent that area, even if there is no infrastructure or latent RL support base there for them to take advantage of. And all costing the game $2.5m a year while competing for limited corporate dollars, juniors and fans in a market that we already dominate while elsewhere there is a new and untapped market that misses out altogether.

Its quite arrogant and misguieded to label others as idiots simply because their opinion differs to your own.

The fact that Brisbane rugby league fans are quite happy to follow the Cowboys or the Titans indicates there's massive support for a non Broncos Brisbane team, at the moment they get the chance to see their team once a season. The $2.5 million grant isn't a zero cum game. The question is wether this team would add $2.5 million to pay for itself, personally I think a Perth or Adelaide team would add more to the NRL pie. There's plenty of Queensland juiniors, most are forced to play outside the state, juniors and players aren't a problem, you have dozens of players heading overseas every year. As for corporate dollars, once again its not a zero sum game. Another league side in Brisbane doesn't necessarily take any sponsors from any other teams. Sponsorship from a corporate point of view is merely advertising. How much is the NRL sponsorship worth compared to Australia wide advertising, its pissing in the ocean and certainly one more Brisbane side isn't going to make it overflow. Your arguement might have merrit if the Brisbane rugby league market was exhausted by the Broncos however there's plenty of evidence of the pontential for another team.

I'd prefer Perth, Adelaide and Wellington teams be added before another Brisbane team but to say a 2nd Brisbane team won't pay for itself is farcical. Of course the NRL lacks the vision and the balls to really be putting the expansion issue on the agenda.

 

[Tidus_Raider]

My argument against Perth and certainly Adelaide in the short term is why expand into areas which are not traditional Rugby League strongholds when you haven't exhausted you options on the East Coast and certainly having maximized the potential of Brisbane and Central Coast.

People argue that we already have a monopoly on Brisbane. Yes RL is very strong in the area. Imagine how much stronger it would be with double the teams. Double the games. Double the players going and visiting local schools. The rivalry. The atmosphere at a true local derby.

With 4 QLD teams you can even incorporate a Queensland Cup type trophy that the Clubs compete for throughout the season. Add some meaning to their games. They don't play any extra games of course, similar to the way the Bledisloe Cup is incorporated into the Tri-Nation in Union. The Cup would go to the highest placed team on the ladder. Just a suggestion.

Its easy to say that we already dominate QLD and rest on our laurels. The NRL should be Pro-active not re-active when it comes to another team in SE Queensland.

 

[East Coast Tiger]

They follow the Cowboys because they a) don't like the bronco's and b) are a Queensland side. You think these people would still follow the cowboys if they had another local team to support. Some might, but the majority? Maybe because they're from North Queensland.



Don't make this personal and don't insult my intelligence by calling me an idiot. How old are you?

If you want to seem sensible start talking sense. You haven't addressed the issue of where the club would be based, who would hold the licence, where they'd play or what their junior and feeder situation would be. Nor have you pointed out why spending (at leats) $2.5 a year on an already strong market is actually going to benefit the game, except to say that it "will make money" and "people will support it" as if it's a given. These issues are totally up in the air, largely and most significantly because there is no club. There is no bid. There is no bid team.


Um, did we not just 'plonk' the Cowboys? Titans? Storm. Have they not succeeded by suddenly representing there area with no infrastructure, support base or juniors? These are new markets.

The only other national league to do this was the AFL. And look what a raging success the Fremantle Dockers and Port Adelaide Power have been.

Firstly, who cares what AFL did. And secondly Port Adelaide are a 100 year old club. If you're going to bang on about AFL at least get a clue. There are three teams in Qld anyway whicn the AFL can't say about SA or WA so it's such a stupid line of argument.


Juniors is not a problem. How many Queenslanders are playing for NSW clubs. How many are playing in the ESL? A second Brisbane team would generate the code money. The more powerful clubs, the healthier the bottom dollar. Do you really think its fair that Brisbane should only have ONE CLUB for the ENTIRE city whereas Sydney has 9? Do you not think that Brisbane has showed in the last decade at least that its a RL city with enormous potential still that hasn't been tapped? Why all the internationals and Test matches? Why is there talk aboutmoving the Grand Final?

So your argument is that it's not fair that there are heaps more clubs in Sydney. Right. Sydney clubs are broke and unsuccessful. That's what happens when you crowd the market. The reason rep games are played there is because a. it's the second biggest RL city in Australia. and b. it makes money. What rep games have to do with a new franchise I don't know.

Like where? Perth? Wellington? Its not ok to 'plonk' a 2nd team into Brisbane, Rugby League heartland and stronghold but its ok for Perth? Where is their junior base? Infrastructure? How many corporate dollars are left with West Coast, fremantle, Perth Glory and Western Force there? if anything Brisbane is the safer hand, its Perth thats the gamble.

And let me just say that i'm not against a Perth side, just not one in place of Brisbane or Central Coast.

Perth already has a team, a team that wants in to the NRL and it has a supporter and player base that is completely unrepresented at present. Don't you get it. A new club in Brisbane won't expand the game one bit. Perth will. Adelaide will. Wellington will. PNG will.

 

[Tidus_Raider]

Maybe because they're from North Queensland.

No sh*t. And there are people residing in Brisbane who are from Sydney orginally baracking for the Saints, Souths etc. That means nothing. What type of argument is that? What of the THOUSANDS of RL fans whoe ARE NOT from North QLD that DON'T support the Broncos.


If you want to seem sensible start talking sense. You haven't addressed the issue of where the club would be based, who would hold the licence, where they'd play or what their junior and feeder situation would be. Nor have you pointed out why spending (at leats) $2.5 a year on an already strong market is actually going to benefit the game, except to say that it "will make money" and "people will support it" as if it's a given. These issues are totally up in the air, largely and most significantly because there is no club. There is no bid. There is no bid team.

Now your just being ridiculous. Of course there is no bid team because the NRL has not come out and said in 2012 or in 2014 we are granting 2 more licenses. Do you think that if David Gallop held a press conference tomorrow and declared that the NRL's plan was to have a second franchise in Brisbane by 2012 that he would not be fielding offers from bid parties in 1-2 months? The bid team would present its propsals of HOW, WHEN, WHERE. The fact that you think there will be a shortage of Juniors in a Brisbane side astounds me. You don't think QLDCup teams would be chomping at the bit to be affiliated, so they can be a feeder club.

These are new markets.

And a second Brisbane team would be a new market. Just because an existing team is currently in the comp does not mean that the same way North QLD, Melbourne and Gold Coast followed a blue print of success cannot be followed by a new team.


Firstly, who cares what AFL did. And secondly Port Adelaide are a 100 year old club. If you're going to bang on about AFL at least get a clue. There are three teams in Qld anyway whicn the AFL can't say about SA or WA so it's such a stupid line of argument.

Get a clue? Port Adelaide are closer to 120 years old and were the most successful SAFL club before being admitted in the AFL mid-90's. Using them as an example is quite reasonable in that it shows ADELAIDE and AFL mad city half the size of Brisbane is able to sustain 2 teams. Do you think the AFL was asking back in 1995 where will the club be based, where will the juniors come from,where will the sponsors be?


So your argument is that it's not fair that there are heaps more clubs in Sydney. Right. Sydney clubs are broke and unsuccessful. That's what happens when you crowd the market. The reason rep games are played there is because a. it's the second biggest RL city in Australia. and b. it makes money. What rep games have to do with a new franchise I don't know.

Here you go again contradicting yourself. So you ackowledge that Brisbane is the 2nd biggest RL city and that it makes money? But you still think a 2nd club wouldn't be successful and that 2.5m dollars a year will go down the drain.

There are 1.9 million people in Brisbane. A 2nd team would hardly be 'over crowding'. To make a comparison betewwn 9 clubs in Sydney and 2 clubs in Brisbane is funny to say the least. Having 2 teams in your 2nd biggest market and 3rd largest City in the country is hardly over-crowding and over saturarion.

Rep games have EVERYTHING to do with franchises. Do you think if the Storm never existed we would take origin down to Melbourne of played a World Cup match there? It hauges the markets appetitie for the sport.

Perth already has a team, a team that wants in to the NRL and it has a supporter and player base that is completely unrepresented at present. Don't you get it. A new club in Brisbane won't expand the game one bit. Perth will. Adelaide will. Wellington will. PNG will.

How many players in the current Perth Reds side do you think will remain in the team if they got an NRL license. How many WA juniors are currently playing in the NRL? You think Perth will increase TV rights? You think Channel 9 will screen in the games live into Perth. Melbourne after 10 years in the comp hardly gets that luxury.

You say they already have a supporter base. I dont disagree they do, judging by the online forums that is quite obvious. but how many do you think they have out there you know, in the REAL WORLD. 5k? 10k maybe? 15 if you want to be generous. You think there are not more then 20 thousand people in Rugby Leagues 2nd Largest city that follow the sport, follow the maroons but don't follow

The fact that you named Adelaide, Wellington and PNG before Central Coast shows how little forsight you have.

You sound like a intelligent person I don't know why you can't see the merit of a secong brisbane team. Maybe one of the mods should add a poll and gauge the rest of the forums opinion. I would be interested to see.

 

[franklin2323]

Brisbane no! SEQ maybe Sunshine Coast. I think we should wait to see how the Titans and Broncos co exist first.
Before adding another to the mix. If the Crushers had the supporters and the sponsors they may of had a chance. I think the majority of Brisbane corporate side of things are either with the Broncos or the Reds. And now A League and AFL are coming as well resources MAY not go that far. See how the situation is in 5 years or so first

 

[tiger_nick]

wont happen because the broncos would have another hissy fit and go start their own comp.

 

[KHunt]

Even though I'm a Broncos fan, sometimes their dominance in a city of 1.8million frustrates me.

I love how the Sydney teams are offering affordable prices for their memberships - some as cheap 60 bucks for consession and 25 for junior I believe? That's peanuts. 12 games for 25/60 bucks is unbelievable. $2/$5 a game respectively. The fans deserve this. Unfortunetly up here the cheapest concession membership I could get is $170. Out of my price range when you have parents that wont chip in a cent and dont have any money! Thats what happens because the Broncos are a 1 team city, charge whatever they wont and offer SOO tickets etc

If Norths unsuccesfully don't make it to the Central Coast I reckon there last option is Brisbane - North Brisbane Bears - Bears have to come back to first grade footy and I couldn't think of a better option for a proposed second team in Brisbane. May struggle initially but would get old bear fans living in SE QLD (plenty of them) plus would get decent crowds when playing in Sydney - would even attract a few thousands Sydney memberships alone. I'd switch to a North Brisbane Bear team - they'd need some new supporters and they'd offer cheaper memberships to the Broncos.

Also North Brisbane I reckon is an area thats getting more AFL juniors/popularity so we need to get a 2nd team so no one gives a sh*t about the Lions.

 

[Joker's Wild]

Even though I'm a Broncos fan, sometimes their dominance in a city of 1.8million frustrates me.

I love how the Sydney teams are offering affordable prices for their memberships - some as cheap 60 bucks for consession and 25 for junior I believe? That's peanuts. 12 games for 25/60 bucks is unbelievable. $2/$5 a game respectively. The fans deserve this. Unfortunetly up here the cheapest concession membership I could get is $170. Out of my price range when you have parents that wont chip in a cent and dont have any money! Thats what happens because the Broncos are a 1 team city, charge whatever they wont and offer SOO tickets etc

If Norths unsuccesfully don't make it to the Central Coast I reckon there last option is Brisbane - North Brisbane Bears - Bears have to come back to first grade footy and I couldn't think of a better option for a proposed second team in Brisbane. May struggle initially but would get old bear fans living in SE QLD (plenty of them) plus would get decent crowds when playing in Sydney - would even attract a few thousands Sydney memberships alone. I'd switch to a North Brisbane Bear team - they'd need some new supporters and they'd offer cheaper memberships to the Broncos.

Also North Brisbane I reckon is an area thats getting more AFL juniors/popularity so we need to get a 2nd team so no one gives a sh*t about the Lions.

Great idea. However any new team really needs to keep the word "Brisbane" out of their name altogether as like it or not it will always be linked to the Broncos.

Northern Bears perhaps

 

[Perth Red]

It's interesting how here in Perth I've met alot of people who have become Dockers fans because they can't get memberships to the Eagles due to stadium selling out.

I could imagine something similiar in Brisbane if the new club came in as the "battlers" club and offered alot cheaper memberships.

 

[The Tank]

There's nothing wrong with the name Brisbane. We have South Sydney, Sydney Roosters... used to have North Sydney. There's also North Melbourne, South Melbourne (Swans), and Melbourne in the flogball.

 

[Tidus_Raider]

Yeah I definatley think it would need the Brisbane name somewhere in there or at the very least the name of the suburban region they represent. North Brisbane. West Brisbane etc.

One of the main arguments I make about a second SE QLD team is that it would bring more footy to SuncorpStadium. No use bringing in a second Brisbane/SE QLD team into the comp if they are not playing out of Suncorp.

Also people seem to think that bids and teams are introduced overnight. A 2nd Brisbane team would have to be atleast another 3-4 years away. And the Gold Coast and Brisbane have already shown they can co-exist quite easily.

 

[Joker's Wild]

There's nothing wrong with the name Brisbane. We have South Sydney, Sydney Roosters... used to have North Sydney. There's also North Melbourne, South Melbourne (Swans), and Melbourne in the flogball.

Yeah I guess so. For me the geographical name "Brisbane" has always signified the Broncos in RL terms and I imagine a new team would want to distance themselves as much as possible from them.

 

[franklin2323]

It's not so much the fans I think they would come to most games involving Qlders. But more so much The Broncos have the corporate backing 2 tthemselves with the A-League and AFL coming to the GC they may get wat's left.

So just base the side just out of Brisbane. They can just use Suncorp for big games still. Sunshine Coast or Ipswich as examples new sponsors etc. Not to far if a fan wants to travel to the game

 

[Tidus_Raider]

Yeah I guess so. For me the geographical name "Brisbane" has always signified the Broncos in RL terms and I imagine a new team would want to distance themselves as much as possible from them.

I would love to see a Queensland Cup side step up to the plate and put its hand up to be included in the NRL. And if they were to gain admittance I would love to see them keep their name. For example Ipswich Jets, Redcliffe Dolphins or Souths Logan Magpies (Wests fans might not be happy but this club is one of the oldest in QLD). Also this way the club would not be entirley 'new' it would already have its own identity and culture and a small following.