Jump to content


League Express

Podcast

Photo
- - - - -

Who should replace London Broncos in Superleague 2014 ?


  • Please log in to reply
377 replies to this topic

#341 dhw

dhw
  • Coach
  • 663 posts

Posted 30 August 2013 - 10:05 AM

Quins took the Broncos in because they knew they would fail (I'm presuming that they did a risk analysis with the RFU). Theyd just been relegated and needed cash to fund the stadium - Broncos were again their meal ticket to develop the stadium as they were in 1997. If Mark Evans was so keen on Quins RL, why did the RU club turn down the chance to buy into the club (thus making it a proper partnership like "Leeds Rugby"? Answer - they knew the Quins RL thing would fail and the money was coming in.
I'm glad Gus Mackay changed the name from the much hated Quins moniker, but it was a mistake to stay at the Stoop whilst doing this. They should have made a clean break from Twickers then whilst the brand still had cred. I'm assuming David Hughes made the decision to remain at the Stoop.

Why would Harlequins RU want to associate and share their name and shirts design with a club that they beiieved would fail ? It makes absolutely no sense. Quins RU were very accommodating and give them  a lot of help. Quins RL contributed nothing to funding the stadium improvements that funding was already in place. Quins were initeally there rent free, kept profits from the bar and had free access to Quins RU marketing team ajnd databses not to mention liks to local schools. As for why they did not buy into Broncos Broncos had nothing to buy and had dwindling support. THe reason for linking up with Broncos was to expand the Harlequins brand it did far more for Broncos than it did for Harlequins. Broncos had a marvellous opportumity, propbably the best they ever had and they did very little with it.

 

 

As for changing the name that has had no effect whatsover if anything under the Quins RL they had more visibility and recognition.



#342 Spicer

Spicer
  • Coach
  • 1,695 posts

Posted 30 August 2013 - 11:03 AM

Even by your standards this is ridiculousness.

Yes indeedy.

 

I should have guessed all along Mark Evans was anti Rugby League and just after a meal ticket for his club.

Even if he was looking to make money for his organisation,isnt that what he was appointed to do amongst other things ?

On the hand Broncos just bimbled along happy just to make money flogging curries and padded seats at £40 a pop to visiting fans.

 

Funnily enough I saw Mr Evans at the HAC in January for the London Derby.

You would have thought someone as anti league as that could have found something better to do with his time.

I do believe he also gave advice regarding the promotion of the Big Hit.

And where is he currently CEO I wonder ?



#343 Spicer

Spicer
  • Coach
  • 1,695 posts

Posted 30 August 2013 - 11:05 AM

Why would Harlequins RU want to associate and share their name and shirts design with a club that they beiieved would fail ? It makes absolutely no sense. Quins RU were very accommodating and give them  a lot of help. Quins RL contributed nothing to funding the stadium improvements that funding was already in place. Quins were initeally there rent free, kept profits from the bar and had free access to Quins RU marketing team ajnd databses not to mention liks to local schools. As for why they did not buy into Broncos Broncos had nothing to buy and had dwindling support. THe reason for linking up with Broncos was to expand the Harlequins brand it did far more for Broncos than it did for Harlequins. Broncos had a marvellous opportumity, propbably the best they ever had and they did very little with it.

 

 

As for changing the name that has had no effect whatsover if anything under the Quins RL they had more visibility and recognition.

 

Absolutely Spot On.



#344 The Parksider

The Parksider
  • Coach
  • 17,007 posts

Posted 30 August 2013 - 03:35 PM

I had a good chat with Mark Evans several years ago at a quins match. Iin his opinion it was more to do with an image problem that RL had with potential fans in the south as being a northern sport and he further said he was very surprised how hard it had been to shake off that image.

 

He further went on to say that in his opinion SL had far to many teams and that 10 would be around the correct number.

 

CM

 

It's hardly going to shake it off dumping them and the southern CC clubs far from taking over the mantle and taking the game forward will only suffer from their removal on this point.

 

I'll go with 10 after all that will free up several £million to support a London club properly. Who said it couldn't be done!! More like they won't do it.......


Edited by The Parksider, 30 August 2013 - 03:36 PM.


#345 Northern Sol

Northern Sol
  • Moderator
  • 17,148 posts

Posted 30 August 2013 - 03:47 PM

Parky was pushing the "Sky / Lewis want a second London SL side so it will happen" angle for years so take his opinions with a couple of tons of salt. Now he says that the RFL won't bail out Broncos. You'd think that this would come with a "I realise that 90% of my previous statements were nonsense".

But it's clear that he is prepared to send any number of heartlands clubs into what he views as the "league of doom" to give a failing side yet another chance. Why not a SL of six clubs? Just wait a couple of years and he'll be arguing for it.

Added to which he seems to have forgotten that a minimum of 12 clubs in SL is a requirement of the Sky deal.

Edited by Northern Sol, 30 August 2013 - 04:04 PM.


#346 Mumby Magic

Mumby Magic
  • Coach
  • 3,158 posts

Posted 30 August 2013 - 05:48 PM

Will Broncos go completely rather then move down a division?


Lilly, Jacob and Isaac, what my life is about. Although our route through life is not how it should be, I am a blessed man.


#347 THE RED ROOSTER

THE RED ROOSTER
  • Coach
  • 2,262 posts

Posted 30 August 2013 - 06:56 PM

Will Broncos go completely rather then move down a division?

 

Yes, The club even back in the mid-noughties when Nic Cartwright allegedly told a BBC hack the club would appeal against relegation has always opposed a drop down. In the south non-Super League Rugby has a ZERO profile.

 

You might ask then why I advocate getting the Skolars into the 24. well like Gareth Walker I struggle to see how 37 pro and semi-pro clubs fit into 24. IMO the new league structure currently shrouded in smoke and mirrors, may change the dynamic of Rugby League to the detriment of any of the clubs out of the 24. In short, it would make a lot of the debate on this thread about dropping down irrelevant.

 

I thought Stevo said that was just his opinion and not from Broncos.

 

Stevo said his belief was that London would be in Super League next year, not having spoken to his great mate DH but to TR instead. If you heard Steve Mascord in the show you will have heard him state how journalists are used by clubs and governing bodies to test public reaction to ideas being debated at club / governing body level. That way if there is an outcry those bodies can claim plausible deniability and to be listening to the views of the fans. This agent provocateur role is performed by Mike Stephenson for DH floating ideas like Gillingham where allegedly the ink was drying on a deal for a move until the outcry following Stevo's statement pre-game v Warrington last year.

 

I
Who made the appalling decision to become Quins RL and move to the Stoop?

 

David Hughes and Nic Cartwright, Ian Lenagan came on board once the deal had been sewn up. Calling the club Quins RL was Mark Evans canny condition which did a lot of for the Harlequins RU brand. Nic thought he had saved the club at the time and in truth ahd little other option given the state of the club's finances. Although like you - but for a competely different reason - for me watching "Quins RL" was like being a muslim being forced to eat pork.

 

Mark told me that he was very surprised that the Quins RL brand had not taken off and said that he had been hoping for average home crowds (without away) of around 5000,in his opinion it was more to do with an image problem that RL had with potential fans in the south as being a northern sport and he further said he was very surprised how hard it had been to shake off that image.

 

CM

 

Honestly reading boards like this and Garry Schofield's RLE column (not to mention recent books) how could he get that impression  :sarcastic:


I am an oil trader and successful at that but, but marketing, finance, business management, human resources etc are not my strengths


 

 

David Hughes to Ian Lenagan Page 134 - A Pastel Revolution - Fletcher and Gordas - 2006

 

Being an outsider, it is easiest to see what is wrong with the sport. It's a fantastic sport that has been undersold and under-marketed  because people who run it probably want to keep it the way it is

 

 

Dr Marwan Koukash to Joanthan Lieu. Sunday Telegraph 9th March 2014

 

 


#348 Lobbygobbler

Lobbygobbler
  • Coach
  • 5,790 posts

Posted 30 August 2013 - 07:17 PM

Yes, The club even back in the mid-noughties when Nic Cartwright allegedly told a BBC hack the club would appeal against relegation has always opposed a drop down. In the south non-Super League Rugby has a ZERO profile.

You might ask then why I advocate getting the Skolars into the 24. well like Gareth Walker I struggle to see how 37 pro and semi-pro clubs fit into 24. IMO the new league structure currently shrouded in smoke and mirrors, may change the dynamic of Rugby League to the detriment of any of the clubs out of the 24. In short, it would make a lot of the debate on this thread about dropping down irrelevant.


Stevo said his belief was that London would be in Super League next year, not having spoken to his great mate DH but to TR instead. If you heard Steve Mascord in the show you will have heard him state how journalists are used by clubs and governing bodies to test public reaction to ideas being debated at club / governing body level. That way if there is an outcry those bodies can claim plausible deniability and to be listening to the views of the fans. This agent provocateur role is performed by Mike Stephenson for DH floating ideas like Gillingham where allegedly the ink was drying on a deal for a move until the outcry following Stevo's statement pre-game v Warrington last year.


David Hughes and Nic Cartwright, Ian Lenagan came on board once the deal had been sewn up. Calling the club Quins RL was Mark Evans canny condition which did a lot of for the Harlequins RU brand. Nic thought he had saved the club at the time and in truth ahd little other option given the state of the club's finances. Although like you - but for a competely different reason - for me watching "Quins RL" was like being a muslim being forced to eat pork.


Honestly reading boards like this and Garry Schofield's RLE column (not to mention recent books) how could he get that impression :sarcastic:

How on Earth could moving to the Stoop have saved the club if Hughes was already involved and we are led to believe he has since put millions into the club??? Why couldnt they have stayed at Brentford as London. If the club had gone bust and been completely taken over I could understand it, but David Hughes has been involved throughout

Edited by Lobbygobbler, 30 August 2013 - 07:28 PM.


#349 Lobbygobbler

Lobbygobbler
  • Coach
  • 5,790 posts

Posted 30 August 2013 - 07:20 PM

Yes indeedy.

I should have guessed all along Mark Evans was anti Rugby League and just after a meal ticket for his club.
Even if he was looking to make money for his organisation,isnt that what he was appointed to do amongst other things ?
On the hand Broncos just bimbled along happy just to make money flogging curries and padded seats at £40 a pop to visiting fans.

Funnily enough I saw Mr Evans at the HAC in January for the London Derby.
You would have thought someone as anti league as that could have found something better to do with his time.
I do believe he also gave advice regarding the promotion of the Big Hit.
And where is he currently CEO I wonder ?


I didnt say Mark Evans was anti RL. However it is clear that the Quins RU club was not that interested in Quins RL otherwise they would have invested in them when they had the chance.

#350 Lobbygobbler

Lobbygobbler
  • Coach
  • 5,790 posts

Posted 30 August 2013 - 07:26 PM

Why would Harlequins RU want to associate and share their name and shirts design with a club that they beiieved would fail ? It makes absolutely no sense. Quins RU were very accommodating and give them a lot of help. Quins RL contributed nothing to funding the stadium improvements that funding was already in place. Quins were initeally there rent free, kept profits from the bar and had free access to Quins RU marketing team ajnd databses not to mention liks to local schools. As for why they did not buy into Broncos Broncos had nothing to buy and had dwindling support. THe reason for linking up with Broncos was to expand the Harlequins brand it did far more for Broncos than it did for Harlequins. Broncos had a marvellous opportumity, propbably the best they ever had and they did very little with it.


As for changing the name that has had no effect whatsover if anything under the Quins RL they had more visibility and recognition.


How do you know the name change had no effect? Did you watch London week in week out at the time like I did? I know lots of people who stopped going the day the name changed.

#351 Spicer

Spicer
  • Coach
  • 1,695 posts

Posted 30 August 2013 - 08:53 PM

I didnt say Mark Evans was anti RL. However it is clear that the Quins RU club was not that interested in Quins RL otherwise they would have invested in them when they had the chance.

 

We will never agree here, but suffice to say Quins could see I would suggest  we were not worth investing in..

 

They got that right big time.



#352 Spicer

Spicer
  • Coach
  • 1,695 posts

Posted 30 August 2013 - 09:11 PM

Will Broncos go completely rather then move down a division?

 

I would say David Hughes will see next  season out in Super League if at all possible.

I doubt personally he will wear a year in the Championship getting 300 or so a home game.

Another year in Super League will see him blow a lot more money but yes I reckon he will continue subject to RFL approval.

I as you can see by my previous posts am very anti currently as regards the way our club seemingly operates,

but that said appreciate only too well without Mr Hughes I would not have had the opportunity

to see the stars of Super League over the last 13 years.



#353 Northern Sol

Northern Sol
  • Moderator
  • 17,148 posts

Posted 30 August 2013 - 09:12 PM

I didnt say Mark Evans was anti RL. However it is clear that the Quins RU club was not that interested in Quins RL otherwise they would have invested in them when they had the chance.

Maybe they were interested at one time but the brands didn't synergise in the way that they had hoped.



#354 Lobbygobbler

Lobbygobbler
  • Coach
  • 5,790 posts

Posted 30 August 2013 - 09:43 PM

I would say David Hughes will see next season out in Super League if at all possible.
I doubt personally he will wear a year in the Championship getting 300 or so a home game.
Another year in Super League will see him blow a lot more money but yes I reckon he will continue subject to RFL approval.
I as you can see by my previous posts am very anti currently as regards the way our club seemingly operates,
but that said appreciate only too well without Mr Hughes I would not have had the opportunity
to see the stars of Super League over the last 13 years.

Spicer - do you know who owned the club at Brentford, just before the fatal name change and move to the Stoop?

Edited by Lobbygobbler, 30 August 2013 - 09:44 PM.


#355 Lobbygobbler

Lobbygobbler
  • Coach
  • 5,790 posts

Posted 31 August 2013 - 08:45 AM

I think that DH owned the majority of the shares when the Broncos went bust for around £ 3 Million.

Virgin paid out a 4 year sponsorship at 500K a season to get out after branson had enough.

CM


Thanks CM

Now heres the bit I dont get (prob because I'm not an accountant).

How could the club go bust if DH is still involved and has been pumping money into the club?

I still also dont see the rationale for the name change or move to the Stoop. Crowds dropped after the move and maybe the club would have done far better staying put, given that the club improved on-the-pitch under Brian Mac since leaving the Griffin Park. Also he was the one who really got the home grown thing going.

#356 Jeff Stein

Jeff Stein
  • Coach
  • 192 posts

Posted 31 August 2013 - 09:26 AM

In all the time I have been watching them, the club has gone bust at four different stadiums: three football grounds and an athletics stadium.

 

Yet apparently the state of the club is down to being in a rugby union ground.



#357 gingerjon

gingerjon
  • Coach
  • 29,026 posts

Posted 31 August 2013 - 10:48 AM

In all the time I have been watching them, the club has gone bust at four different stadiums: three football grounds and an athletics stadium.

 

Yet apparently the state of the club is down to being in a rugby union ground.

 

 

It's okay, lobby is on one of his periodic rewritings of history.


Cheer up, RL is actually rather good
- Severus, July 2012

#358 Martyn Sadler

Martyn Sadler

    League Publications Ltd

  • Moderator
  • 2,786 posts

Posted 31 August 2013 - 10:55 AM

From what I hear, the Broncos are likely to be alive and kicking within Super League next season.

 

I'd put the odds at about 75%.



#359 South Wakefield Sharks

South Wakefield Sharks
  • Coach
  • 2,194 posts

Posted 31 August 2013 - 11:05 AM

From what I hear, the Broncos are likely to be alive and kicking within Super League next season.
 
I'd put the odds at about 75%.


And where would you be looking to live if you were going to play for them next season Martyn? Twickenham? Barnet?

#360 Chronicler of Chiswick

Chronicler of Chiswick
  • Coach
  • 2,438 posts

Posted 31 August 2013 - 11:19 AM

From what I hear, the Broncos are likely to be alive and kicking within Super League next season.

 

I'd put the odds at about 75%.

Given that your sources are likely to be a d*mn*d sight better than those of most of us on here, I find that reassuring - I hope we won't be literally kicking, although at least it would mean that the team'll be showing a lot more 'commitment' than in recent times! As far as a ground's concerned, there's still a lot of kerfufferling going on between Barnet F.C. and the council about terms of use - personally I'd like to see us back at Griifin Park, but I suspect that that's beyond hoping for.






0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users