19 replies to this topic

[flyingking]

Phil Clarke's thoughts on the non-heartlands sides.
http://www.skysports...8525500,00.html

I think that the differences are probably greater than the similarities. I have watched both teams in action in markedly different circumstances. I have been one of 28,000 sports-mad fans in a modern purpose built stadium(AAMI Park) watching the world's best team(Storm) and players(Slater, Smith, Cronk)in the final elimination game before the Grand Final.

I have also watched a very average bottom of the table Broncos side struggle to entertain a couple of thousand die hard fans in a fifty year old stadium. In short Storm enjoy a lot of advantages that are not available to the Broncos. They have finances (in some years too much money!)to attract the best players and consequently be successful and play in a fantastic stadium within 10 minutes of the city centre by public transport. Their success has meant that the team has been embraced by a city which loves top class sport.

Until the Olympics, I had always seen London as a place where sports events happened, rather than being a city which breathes sport. I attended several of the preparation events for London 2012 and none were sold out. London is not an easy place to operate even for long established teams (Arsenal being the only club that has actually managed to build the facilities it wants.) and it is even harder for clubs in minority sports trying to make their impact on the capital.

What can be done to improve the Broncos' fortunes? I would like to see Broncos share a redeveloped River Road stadium with the Skolars. There might be merit in a system where any team reaching the play-offs will before the start of the next season provide London a list of six players from which they can take one on a season loan. The club loaning the player would still have to pay the salary in full but it would not count against their salary cap. I would also like to see the Broncos being marketed more as London's club. For example a different borough is approached for each home game and given 500 tickets to distribute to their schools. Also the Broncos need to have a presence in events associated with London such as the Boat Race, the Lord Mayor's Show, etc.

[Northern Sol]

Aside from the idea re: the boat race etc there is nothing new or original there.

Broncos sharing with Skolars is a dreadful idea. Broncos and Skolars should be in different parts of London tapping different markets. And turning Broncos into a touring side (of London) is bad as well, clubs need roots.

[THE RED ROOSTER]

Broncos sharing with Skolars is the only ground move that makes sense. However to do this would require:

• The 25 million pounds of private investment that allowed Saracens to redevelop Allianz Park
• A CEO with drive and ambiition
• Support from local politicians across all parties
• and most importantly support from the local community for the project which would mean a ground for community use

The Saracens model is the one to use not moving in with another union club but copying the blueprint. I am sure there are some keyboard klatterers out there who no doubt have the odd 25 million down the back of the sofa. if so contact Hector McNeil at the Skolars who appealed for investment last season http://www.loverugby...-in-london.html

In the meantime down here Wellington Phoenix, the only soccer club in the A-League in New Zealand could draw a "crowd" of 4,800 (including me) for their home game with Adelaide United. I think they need some advice from a marketing maestro......

.

[gingerjon]

The difficulty with a ground share with the Skolars is that the ground-to-be-built would be too vast for Championship rugby and likely to reveal a lack of ambition for Super League. And that's before getting on to the idea that if you have £25m to build interest in rugby league in London it would be better spent ensuring there's a competitive team on the field and strong development and marketing behind it. There is nothing wrong with the Stoop as a venue to 'attract' fans - it's exactly the same ground that's regularly full for Harlequins matches.

[Mr Wind Up]

Melbourne Storm averaged 12,685 last season, less than half the capacity. There are 10 Australian football teams in Melbourne, none of which averaged less than 20,000. I wouldnt say they have been embraced, much in the same way that Broncos attendances measure poorly against football. Both Storm and Broncos are victims of being in large cities that prefer another sport, which impacts heavily on their opportunities to grow.

[The Parksider]

What can be done to improve the Broncos' fortunes? .

What can London Broncos learn from Melbourne Storm?

That if they want to be a success like Storm they need to find around six £million a year for the next 20 years.

What can be done to improve the Broncos' fortunes?

New management/ownership/central control - whatever it takes to ensure the club can offer full cap salaries, can market themselves competently, and have coaching teams that get decent performances from the players.

This is wholly achievable.

Their record is they were once the SIXTH best supported side in SL, they once were runners up in SL they once were Wembley finalists.

Storms advantage London will never have is they are an RL club in a country where the game is BIG. Broncos are an RL club in a country where the game is small.

I found Clarke's article to just be filler. I look forward to seeing what happens 2015 against Hudgell's idea London may be centrally run/financed.

Will they be worth it? I think so IF they produce significant numbers of quality RL players and IF in 5 years time Louis McCarthy Scarsbrook isn't the only name trailed out as proof London are important to the game.

Clarkes recounting of a London youth team beating one from Wigan needs to translate to as many Londoners in SL as there are Wiganers. Currently it's Wigan 25 London 5 on that score.

[hindle xiii]

What have Melbourne won before last year...?

[Just to be clear]

Just to be clear, what London can learn from the Melbourne Storm is being owned by the same company that co-owns the league and co-owns one of the broadcast packages instead of being left to fend for itself.

Until last season News Corp owned 50% of the NRL and 50% of Fox Sports as well as 100% of the Storm so they had a vested interest in seeing the club succeed and invest in it accordingly.

They should also learn to have a systematic disregard for the salary cap, but probably best to learn how to do that from someone else.

[gingerjon]

Although I do like that we live in a world in which the current NRL champions are Melbourne and the current AFL champions Sydney.

[Brisvegan]

The only real lesson London Broncos can draw from the Melbourne experience is that in hostile (i.e. apathetic) territory - as a bare minimum - you need that sort of unequivocal success the Storm have had to even get on the radar. In two tier Superleague it's not even close to being good enough for London to occasionally make the play offs. And they haven't even achieved that. Personally I think they blew it when they moved back in with quins and adopted their moniker. If they could have built a top four team then they may have got enough union season ticket holders and speccies like me to pop along in the summer.

[Sir Galahad]

I don't mean to have the answers but London's biggest problem in the short term is that they have been a very poor side for the best part of the last decade. Who remembers the heady days of the expanded Worlc Club Challenge in 1997 when London drew 6,923, 7,819, and 9,846 to the Stoop for their pool matches? It's very hard to market and sell a team that consistently underperforms, especially in a 'non-traditional' marketplace.

IMHO ALL new professional clubs should be part owned and run by the RFL with the funds from the international game used to supplement these teams as happens in sports like cricket. Had this happened from the start the likes of Crusaders may still exist as a top-flight side with their loss a blow the game is still reeling from.

[kioli]

What have Melbourne won before last year...?

The '99 GF

[Viking Warrior]

sorry but didn't melbourne storm used to be south queensland crushers in the old aussie super league days?? i may be wrong but i am sure they were.

[hindle xiii]

The '99 GF

And London made the Cup Final. Roll on those heady days!

[keighley]

I don't mean to have the answers but London's biggest problem in the short term is that they have been a very poor side for the best part of the last decade. Who remembers the heady days of the expanded Worlc Club Challenge in 1997 when London drew 6,923, 7,819, and 9,846 to the Stoop for their pool matches? It's very hard to market and sell a team that consistently underperforms, especially in a 'non-traditional' marketplace.

IMHO ALL new professional clubs should be part owned and run by the RFL with the funds from the international game used to supplement these teams as happens in sports like cricket. Had this happened from the start the likes of Crusaders may still exist as a top-flight side with their loss a blow the game is still reeling from.

The profits from international RL need to be plouighed back into helping RL development in other countries so that we have a bigger better international spread of the game for future World Cups and expand them player base for all even the SL. Any other monies from International RL need to be put into the amateur game in England where there seems to be retrenchment and a subsequent loss of players which will come back to haunt the pro game if not reversed.

SL get the Sky money and any other sponsorship money if they can find one. They attract the big investors. They need to fund their own teams not suck off funds or profits made by the International game.

[Tre Cool]

To have their juniors/reserves playing a much higher standard of comp. London leagues, Hemel and Skolars arent good enough. Storm have a feeder club in QLD.. We now rely quite heavily on local products and to me they look undercooked with big gaping weaknesses in their games.

[Northern Sol]

To have their juniors/reserves playing a much higher standard of comp. London leagues, Hemel and Skolars arent good enough. Storm have a feeder club in QLD.. We now rely quite heavily on local products and to me they look undercooked with big gaping weaknesses in their games.

London juniors are good enough, they just need time. The other problem is that Broncos can't keep their best players.

[South Wakefield Sharks]

London just need a shed load of money. There is nothing there that can't be fixed with good sustained investment and some sound management. Trouble with London is that they are operating on a shoestring budget compared to what is required, and they have made several blunders at management level.

[Wiltshire Rhino]

London need the spine of their team to contain 3 of the best players in the world.

That's what they can learn from Melbourne. ;-)

Edited by Wiltshire Rhino, 28 February 2013 - 08:35 AM.

[Brisvegan]

sorry but didn't melbourne storm used to be south queensland crushers in the old aussie super league days?? i may be wrong but i am sure they were.

I don't think so. The Crushers started up before the super league war began in 1995 and folded soon afterwards, along with the other expansion teams in Perth and Adelaide. They didn't get much right during their short time in existence but the dumbest thing they did was sign a useless union prop called Gareth Morgan, I think, for big money.
I doubt a well run organisation like Melbourne would have had a role for anyone who thought that was a good idea.