Jump to content
Total Rugby League Fans Forum
Sign in to follow this  
Manfred Mann

After Toronto and Toulouse, which expansion clubs would you like to see in Super League?

After Toronto and Toulouse, which expansion clubs would you like to see in Super League?  

97 members have voted

  1. 1. After Toronto and Toulouse, which expansion clubs would you like to see in Super League


  • Please sign in or register to vote in this poll.
  • Poll closes on 12/08/20 at 23:34

Recommended Posts

56 minutes ago, 17 stone giant said:

I always find it hard to envisage a league with huge cities like Paris, New York, Boston, etc. competing against places like Huddersfield, Hull and Salford.

I know there's already London Broncos, but even that sometimes seems odd to me to have such a major city playing a team like Castleford.

It might feel a little strange, but even the NFL, with its mostly big city teams, has the tiny town of Green Bay, Wisconsin with a franchise, up against teams from New York, Chicago and Los Angeles..

It might eventually develop in Super League, if further significant expansion takes place, that nearly half the clubs will be big cities (e.g. London, Toronto, New York, Ottawa, Paris and Boston) some will be medium sized cities (e.g Toulouse, Leeds, Newcastle, and Hull), a few others will be towns ( e.g. Wigan, St Helens,  Warrington, Castleford,), and others will be regions (e.g. Catalans, Avignon-Vaucluse)

Edited by Manfred Mann
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, Manfred Mann said:

the tiny town of Green Bay, Wisconsin

Metro Population: 320,000

They also played games in, and still offer partial season tickets to people from, Milwaukee. That has a metro population of 1.5m.

You were saying something about tiny towns?

  • Like 2

Build a man a fire, and he'll be warm for a day. Set a man on fire, and he'll be warm for the rest of his life. (Terry Pratchett)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Folks, it's not difficult... if you're not interested in a thread subject, just don't post in it.

There's no need to attempt to ridicule those who are interested in it and want to discuss the topic at hand.

There are lots of other topics to discuss on here.

  • Like 1

.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, John Drake said:

Folks, it's not difficult... if you're not interested in a thread subject, just don't post in it.

There's no need to attempt to ridicule those who are interested in it and want to discuss the topic at hand.

There are lots of other topics to discuss on here.

Sorry John

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, gingerjon said:

Metro Population: 320,000

They also played games in, and still offer partial season tickets to people from, Milwaukee. That has a metro population of 1.5m.

You were saying something about tiny towns?

The "city" of Green Bay has 102,000...if we are going to start measuring by the "metro" definiton then UK Rugby League is played in all the top 7 areas in the UK...with 27 million in that "metro population"...follow that through...

Under "metro" Dewsbury has a population of 2,300,000 to aim at...

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, Marty Funkhouser said:

Under "metro" Dewsbury has a population of 2,300,000 to aim at...

Not sure what the problem is with that.


Build a man a fire, and he'll be warm for a day. Set a man on fire, and he'll be warm for the rest of his life. (Terry Pratchett)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, gingerjon said:

Not sure what the problem is with that.

None at all, i'm with you all the way...but then the perennial Rugby League "small town" argument melts away. 

In UK professional Rugby League perhaps only the Cumbrian clubs and West Wales could claim to be in non-populous areas.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Marty Funkhouser said:

The "city" of Green Bay has 102,000...if we are going to start measuring by the "metro" definiton then UK Rugby League is played in all the top 7 areas in the UK...with 27 million in that "metro population"...follow that through...

Under "metro" Dewsbury has a population of 2,300,000 to aim at...

You just showed the fundamental difference between Green Bay and Dewsbury, Castleford, etc.  By playing all those home matches in Milwaukee through the years and other such things, the Packers expanded their catchment area to be all of Wisconsin and became Wisconsin's team rather than just Green Bay's team.  No small town RL club could become West Yorkshire's team, or even their local authority's team because none of them are the only pro RL club within those areas.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Big Picture said:

You just showed the fundamental difference between Green Bay and Dewsbury, Castleford, etc.  By playing all those home matches in Milwaukee through the years and other such things, the Packers expanded their catchment area to be all of Wisconsin and became Wisconsin's team rather than just Green Bay's team.  No small town RL club could become West Yorkshire's team, or even their local authority's team because none of them are the only pro RL club within those areas.

Agreed , but no RL club , even the big ones, are aiming for average attendances of 77000...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
34 minutes ago, Marty Funkhouser said:

Agreed , but no RL club , even the big ones, are aiming for average attendances of 77000...

Well they should be 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 hours ago, Manfred Mann said:

It might eventually develop in Super League, if further significant expansion takes place, that nearly half the clubs will be big cities (e.g. London, Toronto, New York, Ottawa, Paris and Boston) some will be medium sized cities (e.g Toulouse, Leeds, Newcastle, and Hull), a few others will be towns ( e.g. Wigan, St Helens,  Warrington, Castleford,), and others will be regions (e.g. Catalans, Avignon-Vaucluse)

Surely if rugby league grows to that extent it wouldn't be too much of a stretch to add a few more major cities to replace the likes of Hull, Warrington and Castleford? Maybe Wigan and St Helens should be kept to preserve the origins of the sport, but apart from that let's just have major cities. Much more glamorous that way.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, 17 stone giant said:

Surely if rugby league grows to that extent it wouldn't be too much of a stretch to add a few more major cities to replace the likes of Hull, Warrington and Castleford? Maybe Wigan and St Helens should be kept to preserve the origins of the sport, but apart from that let's just have major cities. Much more glamorous that way.

 

I think that you have to preserve many of the bigger traditional clubs  --- Wigan, St Helens, Warrington, Hull FC, Leeds, Catalans, and perhaps Hull KR and Castleford --- in Super League along side the new clubs from bigger cities like London, Toronto, New York, Ottawa, Toulouse  etc. Otherwise the traditional fan base of the game will disappear.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Manfred Mann said:

I think that you have to preserve many of the bigger traditional clubs  --- Wigan, St Helens, Warrington, Hull FC, Leeds, Catalans, and perhaps Hull KR and Castleford --- in Super League along side the new clubs from bigger cities like London, Toronto, New York, Ottawa, Toulouse  etc. Otherwise the traditional fan base of the game will disappear.

If instead the glamorous big city teams are in a new, separate league of their own, then the traditional fans can still see all the traditional teams in their traditional league and we could have the best of both worlds.

Edited by Big Picture

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, Big Picture said:

If instead the glamorous big city teams are in a new, separate league of their own, then the traditional fans can still see all the traditional teams in their traditional league and we could have the best of both worlds.

Good idea .... they could call the separate league of their own "Super League" while the traditional clubs play in a "Championship" and "League 1".

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, RL does what Sky says said:

Good idea .... they could call the separate league of their own "Super League" while the traditional clubs play in a "Championship" and "League 1".

That name is already in use and it's probably been tarnished by that use in view of how little about the "Super League" is super, so another name representing a distinctly different approach would likely be better.

Edited by Big Picture
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Big Picture said:

That name is already in use and it's probably been tarnished by that use in view of how little about the "Super League" is super, so another name representing a distinctly different approach would likely be better.

I can understand that feeling. Even when the name "Super League" made its debut in 1996 I couldn't understand why that name was used as it did not actually convey to people which sport it was associated with.

That non-descript name has become even more confusing for some people these days as we now have the Chinese Super League (football) and the Netball Superleague (at least the latter tells you which sport it is).

In fact, this headline is from the BBC Sport website ... "Superleague's decision to introduce an additional round of games for the 2020 season is "senseless"

That is actually a netball item but who knows at first glance ?

If the RL authorities (and Sky TV) want to keep the name for the sport why not call it "Rugby Super League" or "Super R. L." .... or even just change it back to the "Rugby League Championship" with Divisions 1 and 2 below it ?

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Manfred Mann said:

 

I think that you have to preserve many of the bigger traditional clubs  --- Wigan, St Helens, Warrington, Hull FC, Leeds, Catalans, and perhaps Hull KR and Castleford --- in Super League along side the new clubs from bigger cities like London, Toronto, New York, Ottawa, Toulouse  etc. Otherwise the traditional fan base of the game will disappear.

Who cares about traditional fans from northern English pit towns? They don't have any money. We're talking here about a glamorous future for global rugby league. Let's not drag it down with teams from places like Hull and Castleford. Let's keep it upmarket.

Man of Kent has the right idea, although I think even he needs to broaden his horizons somewhat. Where's Rome, Madrid and Berlin in his list?

Personally, I think we should be looking at a North American conference and a European conference, with the winners of each meeting for the Rugby League World Series Grand Final Super Bowl Challenge Cup at the end of the season.

  • Like 1
  • Haha 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, 17 stone giant said:

Who cares about traditional fans from northern English pit towns?

Just which northern English towns are you meaning that currently have these pits ?

Therz none ont this side ut Pennines but thi meet av um o'er t'hill !

Edited by RL does what Sky says

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Man of Kent said:

My proposed World Wide Rugby League:

New York

Toronto

Boston

Paris

Toulouse

London

Barcelona

Milan

Perth

Shanghai

Dubai

Mumbai

St Helens

 

You have descended back down to extreme caricature, in a feeble attempt to ridicule possible future expansion, instead of trying to present a rational argument. It is not funny and definitely not smart. But I guess that is all you are intellectually capable of.

Edited by Manfred Mann
  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The question is After Toronto and Toulouse, which expansion clubs would you like to see in Super League?

My answer is .... none !

I want to be able to afford to support my team by going to watch them .... and how can I do that if they are regularly playing away in places like Toronto, Toulouse, Catalan, New York, Ottawa ?

Those teams might sound good to those sat in their armchair every week watching the game on Sky TV but what about that traditional fan base of the game that was mentioned earlier ?  It would appear that the support of Rugby League by many people for 60+ years - during which times we continued to give it our backing and were the ones putting our own money into the game before it became more fashionable and for others to then jump on the bandwagon - actually counts for nothing.

But, of course, they are just old-timers and know nothing about the game.

 

Edited by RL does what Sky says
  • Thanks 1
  • Haha 1
  • Confused 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, Manfred Mann said:

You have descended back down to extreme caricature, in a feeble attempt to ridicule possible future expansion, instead of trying to present a rational argument. It is not funny and definitely not smart. But I guess that is all you are intellectually capable of.

Ooh, priggish.

No, I’m not ridiculing expansion. I’m ridiculing fantasists...

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, RugbyLeagueMan said:

Nobody is asking you to travel and there are many others who will. Supporters in other codes like RU and soccer don't seem to have this problem......perhaps lay off the beer and learn to save up?

Why is it that some people can't have a reasonable conversation without insulting anyone who disagrees with their own point of view ?

If that is your attitude that there's no point in carrying on this discussion with you.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

My genuine hope is that we can grow the game both in the UK, Europe and North America simultaneously and not necessarily through the same methods. 

NA undoubtedly has the ability to revolutionise the game in terms of image and positive approach. 

France needs bringing back to the stage where they are competitive with their English counter parts.

The rest of the UK (and Ireland) needs a slightly different approach that relies on the game increasing its profile - something which is in part reliant on the other two areas of expansion growing as well as capitalising on international rugby.

For me in an ideal world we'd reach a stage where we had a core of 4 to 6 stable French teams playing across the RFL to the point where they are professional enough to go back to France and form the core of the top professional tier of their own League. This opens the door for European games between the leagues and I think would help convince the wider French public to take the game more seriously.

In a similar way in NA I'd like to think a NA conference to SL could be the basis of a NA league with a champions league-esque cup comp keeping us all in contact. 

Perhaps that is fantasy but in the Medium to long term I think that's what's needed. We in this country should see our role as incubators to provide 'proof of concept' for our neighbours. In such a world the burden of expansion wouldn't be entirely on our shoulders anymore either - Serbian teams for example could look to the French league.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Sign in to follow this  

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.



×
×
  • Create New...