Why does Brisbane only have 1 team?

[bondy064]

Can't believe there really are other people out there that have the same view point as me....after all this time ive found you. Broncos taking money from the Mining Billionare to keep players i thought was scummy. Having Norths Devils, East Tigers, Wynnum-Manly, Central Comets, Redcliffe and Burleigh in the Qld Cup as reserve teams i thought was scummy. NOW THAT REALLY TOOK AWAY WHAT THE QLD CUP WAS PROVIDING FOR YOUNG TALENT IN QLD.

 

[Fraser]

Can't believe there really are other people out there that have the same view point as me....after all this time ive found you. Broncos taking money from the Mining Billionare to keep players i thought was scummy. Having Norths Devils, East Tigers, Wynnum-Manly, Central Comets, Redcliffe and Burleigh in the Qld Cup as reserve teams i thought was scummy. NOW THAT REALLY TOOK AWAY WHAT THE QLD CUP WAS PROVIDING FOR YOUNG TALENT IN QLD.

You're right. Broncos are scum.

Johnsy, they had something in their contract when they started too about being the only side in QLD which is why Gold Coast played in Tweed Heads. Gold Coast were always going to succeed from that.

Someone tell me how rugby league in Brisbane has improved since the Broncos inception in 1988? Junior numbers are appaling at 26, which inc. Logan and Redcliffe. Penrith has 26 alone and Sydney altogether has over 120.

 

[Bluebags1908]

It's a joke that Brisbane only has 1 team. They could and should have 2 teams playing out of their own home ground wiht selected blockbusters at Suncorp.

 

[Perth Red]

It's a joke that Brisbane only has 1 team. They could and should have 2 teams playing out of their own home ground wiht selected blockbusters at Suncorp.

WHY? Why would you want the best RL stadium in the country to sit empty for most of the year whilst two suburban teams played games in front of 15,000?

By 2020 there will be a South Q'land something or others playing out of Suncorp alongside the Broncos imo.

 

[fightingirish69]

brisbane had wests,easts,norths,souths, brothers ,valleys, redcliffe and wynum. pre-1988. these teams provided countless origin players and kangaroos.

since 1988 broncos have supplied countless origin players and kangaroos.

it just condensed it thats all

 

[Fampa]

I don't think you can compare Brisbane of 2009, in terms of commercial interest or even rugby league support, with that of 1988 or even 1995.

Brisbane pre 1988 was primed for a league franchise. Crowds at BRL matches were great and the playing stocks were there to compete. Of course the juniors situations was great back then - what kid played VFL or soccer in 87? The weird ones that came from other states or countries.

Every club relies on sponsorship, regardless of whether it's privately owned or not, just ask Cronulla and Souths. Sure there is more of a corporate dollar in Brisbane 20 years on, but that dollar is not clamoring to get on board rugby league. Reading the newspapers in the past few months, one can see why.

I don't blame the Broncos, or any club for that matter, for running itself like a business. It's what ensures longevity. Tradition and all that is fine (don't get me started on jerseys), but it doesn't count for much when your team dies a slow crushing financial death.

I don't think Brisbane is ready yet for a second team. It's not to say they won't be. But I sat in that empty Lang Park ground with my Crushers season ticket with Casey the mascot as my only companion. (OK, so it wasn't that bad - that's probably why you could get into grandstand seats for free towards the end). A team can't be successful in Brisbane just because some people hate the Broncos. If the Crushers were honestly viable, financially and on the field, the NRL wouldn't have caved into the Broncos (SL's main protagonists) so easily.

Don't mistake my basis here, yes I'm a Broncos season ticket holder (just as I was with the Crushers), but I wouldn't call myself a fan. I also have a Titans season ticket and am a member of a few QRL clubs, I would love to see more clubs, read more NRL matches, in SE QLD. But I'm a realist. I'd rather spend time, money and passion on a club that has a realistic chance of making it, not just because someone looked at population stats and pulled out a map.

 

[Brutus]

But I sat in that empty Lang Park ground with my Crushers season ticket with Casey the mascot as my only companion. (OK, so it wasn't that bad - that's probably why you could get into grandstand seats for free towards the end). .

You obviously didn't attend Crushers games when they attracted a 21k average in their first year.

By their 3rd year they were playing in half a comp and the local Brisbane press (a News LTD monopoly) had no intentions of giving them any coverage at all.

Using the Crushers as the reason Bris shouldn't have a 2nd team is extremely unfair.

It's just like using the Western Reds as a reason why a team in Perth will never work.

 

[1 Eyed TEZZA]

Every club relies on sponsorship, regardless of whether it's privately owned or not, just ask Cronulla and Souths. Sure there is more of a corporate dollar in Brisbane 20 years on, but that dollar is not clamoring to get on board rugby league. Reading the newspapers in the past few months, one can see why.

Im sorry but thats just not true. Brisbane are one of the luckiest clubs as they are actually turning away sponsors. They have an abundance to choose from. A second Brisbane team would have no problems financially.

 

[Fraser]

You obviously didn't attend Crushers games when they attracted a 21k average in their first year.

By their 3rd year they were playing in half a comp and the local Brisbane press (a News LTD monopoly) had no intentions of giving them any coverage at all.

Using the Crushers as the reason Bris shouldn't have a 2nd team is extremely unfair.

It's just like using the Western Reds as a reason why a team in Perth will never work.

Exactly. Only an AFL fan would say such a thing using the Crushers, like they were saying all along that the Gold Coast Titans wouldn't work because they failed 10 years ago.

 

[Green Machine]

Didn't Brisbane do a deal after the SL war stating they were to be the SOLE franchise in the Sth East of Qld for X number of years?

That deal expired prior to the Titians being awarded the 16th NRL licence

 

[Green Machine]

You're right. Broncos are scum.

Johnsy, they had something in their contract when they started too about being the only side in QLD which is why Gold Coast played in Tweed Heads. Gold Coast were always going to succeed from that.

That is pure bullsh*t. The Giants, who were taken over by Tweed Heads Rugby League club after the first 2 seasons, played at Seagulls because it was the best stadium in the Tweed/Gold Coast region. In fact, in 1996, when the ARL took over the Licence, they moved to Carrara,

 

[_Johnsy]

The real reason is Talbot would more than likely go broke.

 

[Perth Red]

Im sorry but thats just not true. Brisbane are one of the luckiest clubs as they are actually turning away sponsors. .

I've heard this numerous times, is there any evidence this is true? If so why would they be turning sponsors away? Surely with the range of sponsorship opportunities and corporate boxes at Suncorp there would be no need to be turning them away?

Brisbanes income is still less than half of alot of AFL clubs so to say they have reached their max earning potential is a fallacy.

 

[Bluebags1908]

WHY? Why would you want the best RL stadium in the country to sit empty for most of the year whilst two suburban teams played games in front of 15,000?

By 2020 there will be a South Q'land something or others playing out of Suncorp alongside the Broncos imo.

I've suggested they use their own home ground because it gives them a sense of community ownership and engages them within the local community better. But if a 2nd Brisbane team plays full-time out of Suncorp that wouldn't bother me either.

It's no co-incidence that when David Gallop talks up a 2nd Brisbane team that he talks about it being based in Logan/Ipswich. I know Ipswich is West Brisbane but Logan City is south and is smack-bang between the City of Brisbane and Gold Coast City. This would be the LAST thing the AFL Gold Coast team needs. It's not just the extra NRL team and publciity and expansion that goes with having a game in brisbane every week it's also everything underneath - Under 20's team, junior development in a League stronghold.

 

[Quidgybo]

WHY? Why would you want the best RL stadium in the country to sit empty for most of the year whilst two suburban teams played games in front of 15,000?

By 2020 there will be a South Q'land something or others playing out of Suncorp alongside the Broncos imo.

See there's where I think we'd go wrong. We have a comp with a finite number of spots and only a certain amount of those can be allocated to SE Queensland. But do we really need a second team based out of Suncorp while areas such as Sunshine Coast (essentially Caboolture to Gympie) and West of Brisbane (Ipswich to Toowoomba) are left without teams? Brisbane city has a team, and it's (currently) the Broncos, like it or not. There are other areas in SE Qld that we as a game need to tap before we go back and start cutting up an existing market more finely.

Rule number one of national pro sports is you don't go starting new franchises where they'll cut into the market of an existing team. You put them where they'll grow the reach of the sport and lock out the competition (ie. AFL, Union, Soccer). Putting another team in Brisbane primaily to hurt those bastard Broncos or utilise one particular stadium just isn't the right motivation. Especially if it leaves an opening for a rival code to get in first on the Sunshine Coast or Toowoomba. This is a lesson we should already have learned. While we have teams treading on each other for the same territory and same dollar in Sydney, we leave the Central Coast open to the A-League.

None of this means we can't be creative about using a great venue like Suncorp. But rather than creating another Suncorp based side in direct competition to the Broncos, we should be treating Suncorp as a hub for blockbuster games across the wider region. Instead of another Brisbane city team, we should introduce two new franchises, one 70-100km north of Brisbane and one 70-100km west of Brisbane to go with the existing Titans based 100km south of Brisbane. If each of those three teams circling Brisbane played their six derby games against each other at the regional hub then there's an extra six 30,000+ crowds each year at Suncorp. Throw in one more high drawing home game from each of those three sides and you have 21 games at Suncorp each season.

But you don't just end up with a game in Brisbane city 7 out of every 8 weekends during the season. You also end up with 10 games on the Sunshine Coast, 10 games in Toowoomba and 10 games on the Gold Coast. Instead of ending up with teams in direct competition competing for the same fans and same dollar, we create teams that each have their own distinct market and sustainable support base. We cover the entire region, ensuring it's not just those fortunate enough to live in Brisbane city that have easy access to our game, while simultaneously leaving no area where rival codes can build a base without taking us on head to head.

For those Rugby League fans in Brisbane city who don't like the Broncos, they'd get a range of alternative games and alternative teams playing at Suncorp throughout the season. And for Rugby League fans in other parts of SE Queensland who find the trip to Brisbane city too far, there'd now be a local alternative. More games in Brisbane, more games at Suncorp, more accessibility to the game across the region and fewer openings for rival codes. It's win-win for Rugby League.

Leigh.

 

[Mortar]

I've heard this numerous times, is there any evidence this is true? If so why would they be turning sponsors away? Surely with the range of sponsorship opportunities and corporate boxes at Suncorp there would be no need to be turning them away?

Brisbanes income is still less than half of alot of AFL clubs so to say they have reached their max earning potential is a fallacy.

http://www.news.com.au/couriermail/story/0,23739,25888439-10389,00.html

BRISBANE'S major sponsor could lose up to $1 million in brand exposure if the Broncos fail to make the NRL finals this season.

However, the financial fallout won't stop with WOW Sight and Sound if the embattled Broncos miss the finals for the first time since 1991.

The six-time premiers' own bottom line would also take a hit and jeopardise their brand's current billing as No. 1 across both the NRL and AFL.

The official half-yearly Football Bench-Marking Report, compiled by brand analysis specialist Repucom International, found the Broncos have delivered $2.9 million worth of value to their sponsors so far this season.

The figure, calculated over the first half of 2009, is the highest nationally across both the NRL and AFL.

 

[Canard]

That is pure bullsh*t. The Giants, who were taken over by Tweed Heads Rugby League club after the first 2 seasons, played at Seagulls because it was the best stadium in the Tweed/Gold Coast region. In fact, in 1996, when the ARL took over the Licence, they moved to Carrara,

One of the other factors that placed them in NSW (Tweed Heads) was the fact that Seagulls was a licenced club with pokies (which wasn't allowed in QLD at the time).

In fact pensioners used to jump on a bus every pension day, cross the border, and play the one armed bandits to their hearts content.

 

[ozjet1]

http://www.news.com.au/couriermail/story/0,23739,25888439-10389,00.html

please tell me you understand basic accounting.

Perth Red was referring to revenue. You've countered it by referring to an asset.

and of course the Broncos value to sponsors is going to be greater than any other club in the land. they virtually own friday night football these days so have more games on free-to-air with a reach of over half the country's populaltion. at least the AFL rotate it amongst several clubs.

 

[ozjet1]

queensland needs a fourth team, but agree with others that basing it out of lang park will be a fast track to its demise. a 2nd team representing brisbane city will not attract new fans. it will make a small in-road into the 'apathetic to the broncos' market, but that's bout it. unless they can get a clear differentiation in the new club's image in contrast to the glitz of the broncos then it would fail.

the Fremantle Dockers successfully managed to do this in Perth, branding itself as a working-class club for the city's south-siders, in contrast to the toffee West Coast Eagles for the city's north. but the situation in Brisbane is unlike the AFL situation in Perth where the West Coast were selling out their stadium week-in and week-out, and also, have waiting list for season tix, and still do.

get one up in the sunshine coast playing out of a 25k seat stadium would be ideal. it's a growth region that the rugby league should capitalise on now.

get anot

 

[BDH]

Rule number one of national pro sports is you don't go starting new franchises where they'll cut into the market of an existing team. You put them where they'll grow the reach of the sport and lock out the competition (ie. AFL, Union, Soccer). Putting another team in Brisbane primaily to hurt those bastard Broncos or utilise one particular stadium just isn't the right motivation. Especially if it leaves an opening for a rival code to get in first on the Sunshine Coast or Toowoomba. This is a lesson we should already have learned. While we have teams treading on each other for the same territory and same dollar in Sydney, we leave the Central Coast open to the A-League.

Oh you must be a Broncos fan talking like that...it makes sense!

I can't understand how fans of defunct Sydney clubs and fans of clubs with serious financial problems, look at population base and summarise that Brisbane can support another team.

Have we learned nothing in the last 15 years? Whether it helps your team or not, we need the NRL as a code to grow. Hurting the most (off field) successful club doesn't do that.

Sunshine Coast and Ipswich already have the grounds, they just need stadiums built. New clubs with local identity work.