|
Waz
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 19K,
Visits: 0
|
+x+x+xThere is another positive in this. If Roar are looking at any move north, be it Dolphin or otherwise, it frees up the whole Sth West of Brisbane for a second team. While Roar were spreading themselves from Redcliffe to Logan it was all a bit confusing. At the moment Roar men are staying at Logan so your predicament still exists.
I also disagree that any side has to represent part of Brisbane and not the whole of Brisbane mind you.
It’s entirely acceptable for a side to represent a geographic segment of Brisbane if that’s who they are, equally it’s acceptable for a side to represent the entire city irrespective of where they’re based, play or train.
I don’t see Liverpool being geographically divided with certain post codes supposed to support red and the other blue and the same in Manchester, whether you support city or United is not based on proximity to stadium or training ground.
It’s an unusually Australian thing, probably an outcome of the franchise models multiple codes run, to think that location means much - that sort of thinking is an inhibitor to proper football culture, as if allegiance is determined by your post code. It isn’t, and it shouldn’t be. Tell that to a West Ham or Tottenham supporter. The point is, if Roar represents Brisbane (which incidentally is the largest city by area in Australia) then where does a second club draw supporters from. Everton and Liverpool have a century old heritage (originally there was a religious divide) to draw on. I suppose if you want the second Brisbane team to bring their 1500 club supporters and be satisfied with that then all good. Just don’t complain about crowd numbers. Understanding why Melbourne City don’t have decent crowds while WSW does is not rocket science. I know a West Ham supporter who lives in Doncaster (the one in England) who was born in Newcastle. You are more likely to support a local team admittedly, but there’s other influences that drive it too - it’s not prescriptive as a franchise model would have you believe.
When it comes to individual cities and how teams fit in, that’s simply a matter of getting the identity right which Heart never did and in Brisbane it will be even harder.
Roar draw support equally from north and south of the river and it’s a 49%/51% South/North split on ticket sales and membership - a total number of 60,000+ unique individuals .... it’s entirely possible some of those would migrate to a second club should they arrive in Brisbane but equally true that the 30,000 folk following Roar today can’t be told they should support a new club based on which side of the river they live on.
Any new club is going to have to figure out how to attract support - appealing to a North/South divide in Brisbane is not as clear cut as the East/West divide in Sydney.
Only when you get far south (Logan), far North (Pen Power) or Far West (Ipswich) do those identities become distinct imo. Teams like Strikers, City and even Lions are only going to differentiate themselves on being “not Roar” which is what Heart tried and failed with Victory.
For now Roar train in Logan in the south, base their women in the North at South Pine, and play in the Center at Suncorp, occasionally far north at Redcliffe, and the women play out West at Lions .... Looks like they’re trying to own the city to me
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Waz
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 19K,
Visits: 0
|
+x+x+xThere is another positive in this. If Roar are looking at any move north, be it Dolphin or otherwise, it frees up the whole Sth West of Brisbane for a second team. While Roar were spreading themselves from Redcliffe to Logan it was all a bit confusing. At the moment Roar men are staying at Logan so your predicament still exists.
I also disagree that any side has to represent part of Brisbane and not the whole of Brisbane mind you.
It’s entirely acceptable for a side to represent a geographic segment of Brisbane if that’s who they are, equally it’s acceptable for a side to represent the entire city irrespective of where they’re based, play or train.
I don’t see Liverpool being geographically divided with certain post codes supposed to support red and the other blue and the same in Manchester, whether you support city or United is not based on proximity to stadium or training ground.
It’s an unusually Australian thing, probably an outcome of the franchise models multiple codes run, to think that location means much - that sort of thinking is an inhibitor to proper football culture, as if allegiance is determined by your post code. It isn’t, and it shouldn’t be. If you start local and follow your team up the football pyramid, you can end up with post code determining most of your team's following - as it should be. "Our team" means something in that context. Without P/R (yes, that again) it is a different kettle of fish at the top level for our teams - since teams just appear there without any following growing out of their own roots. Brisbane Roar to me has no postcode base location for 'local' support - just the generic Brisbane/Queensland plus anyone else who wants to follow the best team in the league. Having supporters based on “postcode” actually works against pro/rel because teams are allocated by geography, not ability.
A city needs to be a patchwork quilt of supporters, not something artificially created.
In Tranmere do they support Tranmere Rovers or Liverpool/Everton?
In Stockport do they support County or City/United?
I spent a decade working/playing/coaching at a place called Newark on Trent and no one supported Forest, County or Lincoln City because they were local clubs, most supported Arsenal, United, or Liverpool and had never even been there in most cases.
That’s just football - Australia has to stop telling people who to support and let clubs work harder to attract and keep fans.
|
|
|
|
|
clockwork orange
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 8.3K,
Visits: 0
|
+x+x+x+xThere is another positive in this. If Roar are looking at any move north, be it Dolphin or otherwise, it frees up the whole Sth West of Brisbane for a second team. While Roar were spreading themselves from Redcliffe to Logan it was all a bit confusing. At the moment Roar men are staying at Logan so your predicament still exists.
I also disagree that any side has to represent part of Brisbane and not the whole of Brisbane mind you.
It’s entirely acceptable for a side to represent a geographic segment of Brisbane if that’s who they are, equally it’s acceptable for a side to represent the entire city irrespective of where they’re based, play or train.
I don’t see Liverpool being geographically divided with certain post codes supposed to support red and the other blue and the same in Manchester, whether you support city or United is not based on proximity to stadium or training ground.
It’s an unusually Australian thing, probably an outcome of the franchise models multiple codes run, to think that location means much - that sort of thinking is an inhibitor to proper football culture, as if allegiance is determined by your post code. It isn’t, and it shouldn’t be. If you start local and follow your team up the football pyramid, you can end up with post code determining most of your team's following - as it should be. "Our team" means something in that context. Without P/R (yes, that again) it is a different kettle of fish at the top level for our teams - since teams just appear there without any following growing out of their own roots. Brisbane Roar to me has no postcode base location for 'local' support - just the generic Brisbane/Queensland plus anyone else who wants to follow the best team in the league. Having supporters based on “postcode” actually works against pro/rel because teams are allocated by geography, not ability.
A city needs to be a patchwork quilt of supporters, not something artificially created.
In Tranmere do they support Tranmere Rovers or Liverpool/Everton?
In Stockport do they support County or City/United?
I spent a decade working/playing/coaching at a place called Newark on Trent and no one supported Forest, County or Lincoln City because they were local clubs, most supported Arsenal, United, or Liverpool and had never even been there in most cases.
That’s just football - Australia has to stop telling people who to support and let clubs work harder to attract and keep fans. Yep we can always point out exceptions. The point is, you are more likely to support a team if you have some affinity to it, eh? I think you’ll find that geographical location is one of the more common ways people relate to teams. I know some of you think it is merely coincidental that most WSW supporters are from Western Sydney, but I have a hunch there’s more to it. Yes, I know someone’s cousin lives at Bondi and supports WSW. Fantastic! Go on dreaming that MC will gain massive crowds with no geographical distinction from Victory ... any year now. Same goes for any second team in Brisbane. They couldn’t even make a second NRL team a goer in Brisbane, but strangely (and I’m sure it is just coincidence) when they put one in different geographical locations (Much smaller population centres) - Gold Coast and Townsville .... Just wow? Who’d have guessed.
|
|
|
|
|
clockwork orange
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 8.3K,
Visits: 0
|
+x+x+x+xThere is another positive in this. If Roar are looking at any move north, be it Dolphin or otherwise, it frees up the whole Sth West of Brisbane for a second team. While Roar were spreading themselves from Redcliffe to Logan it was all a bit confusing. At the moment Roar men are staying at Logan so your predicament still exists.
I also disagree that any side has to represent part of Brisbane and not the whole of Brisbane mind you.
It’s entirely acceptable for a side to represent a geographic segment of Brisbane if that’s who they are, equally it’s acceptable for a side to represent the entire city irrespective of where they’re based, play or train.
I don’t see Liverpool being geographically divided with certain post codes supposed to support red and the other blue and the same in Manchester, whether you support city or United is not based on proximity to stadium or training ground.
It’s an unusually Australian thing, probably an outcome of the franchise models multiple codes run, to think that location means much - that sort of thinking is an inhibitor to proper football culture, as if allegiance is determined by your post code. It isn’t, and it shouldn’t be. Tell that to a West Ham or Tottenham supporter. The point is, if Roar represents Brisbane (which incidentally is the largest city by area in Australia) then where does a second club draw supporters from. Everton and Liverpool have a century old heritage (originally there was a religious divide) to draw on. I suppose if you want the second Brisbane team to bring their 1500 club supporters and be satisfied with that then all good. Just don’t complain about crowd numbers. Understanding why Melbourne City don’t have decent crowds while WSW does is not rocket science. I know a West Ham supporter who lives in Doncaster (the one in England) who was born in Newcastle. You are more likely to support a local team admittedly, but there’s other influences that drive it too - it’s not prescriptive as a franchise model would have you believe.
Waz. I am not necessarily advocating setting up another franchise. I’m saying that no second club will succeed Long term in SE Qld if it is not geographically separate from Roar. Sure, one may get promoted... but it won’t survive two seasons if it’s only supporters are the 1,500 that came with it from the NPL. Aligning with a community is the easiest way to create an identity.
Has there been a football franchise of any code in the last 50 years that has succeeded without a community identity?
|
|
|
|
|
miron mercedes
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 2.7K,
Visits: 0
|
+x+x+x+x+xThere is another positive in this. If Roar are looking at any move north, be it Dolphin or otherwise, it frees up the whole Sth West of Brisbane for a second team. While Roar were spreading themselves from Redcliffe to Logan it was all a bit confusing. At the moment Roar men are staying at Logan so your predicament still exists.
I also disagree that any side has to represent part of Brisbane and not the whole of Brisbane mind you.
It’s entirely acceptable for a side to represent a geographic segment of Brisbane if that’s who they are, equally it’s acceptable for a side to represent the entire city irrespective of where they’re based, play or train.
I don’t see Liverpool being geographically divided with certain post codes supposed to support red and the other blue and the same in Manchester, whether you support city or United is not based on proximity to stadium or training ground.
It’s an unusually Australian thing, probably an outcome of the franchise models multiple codes run, to think that location means much - that sort of thinking is an inhibitor to proper football culture, as if allegiance is determined by your post code. It isn’t, and it shouldn’t be. Tell that to a West Ham or Tottenham supporter. The point is, if Roar represents Brisbane (which incidentally is the largest city by area in Australia) then where does a second club draw supporters from. Everton and Liverpool have a century old heritage (originally there was a religious divide) to draw on. I suppose if you want the second Brisbane team to bring their 1500 club supporters and be satisfied with that then all good. Just don’t complain about crowd numbers. Understanding why Melbourne City don’t have decent crowds while WSW does is not rocket science. I know a West Ham supporter who lives in Doncaster (the one in England) who was born in Newcastle. You are more likely to support a local team admittedly, but there’s other influences that drive it too - it’s not prescriptive as a franchise model would have you believe.
Waz. I am not necessarily advocating setting up another franchise. I’m saying that no second club will succeed Long term in SE Qld if it is not geographically separate from Roar. Sure, one may get promoted... but it won’t survive two seasons if it’s only supporters are the 1,500 that came with it from the NPL. Aligning with a community is the easiest way to create an identity.
Has there been a football franchise of any code in the last 50 years that has succeeded without a community identity?
if a second team happens in SE Qld it has to be Ipswich. The city has a long proud football tradition ,it can draw from the ever expanding western corridor, and they hate Brisbane with a passion ..what more could you want ?
|
|
|
|
|
clockwork orange
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 8.3K,
Visits: 0
|
+x+x+x+x+x+xThere is another positive in this. If Roar are looking at any move north, be it Dolphin or otherwise, it frees up the whole Sth West of Brisbane for a second team. While Roar were spreading themselves from Redcliffe to Logan it was all a bit confusing. At the moment Roar men are staying at Logan so your predicament still exists.
I also disagree that any side has to represent part of Brisbane and not the whole of Brisbane mind you.
It’s entirely acceptable for a side to represent a geographic segment of Brisbane if that’s who they are, equally it’s acceptable for a side to represent the entire city irrespective of where they’re based, play or train.
I don’t see Liverpool being geographically divided with certain post codes supposed to support red and the other blue and the same in Manchester, whether you support city or United is not based on proximity to stadium or training ground.
It’s an unusually Australian thing, probably an outcome of the franchise models multiple codes run, to think that location means much - that sort of thinking is an inhibitor to proper football culture, as if allegiance is determined by your post code. It isn’t, and it shouldn’t be. Tell that to a West Ham or Tottenham supporter. The point is, if Roar represents Brisbane (which incidentally is the largest city by area in Australia) then where does a second club draw supporters from. Everton and Liverpool have a century old heritage (originally there was a religious divide) to draw on. I suppose if you want the second Brisbane team to bring their 1500 club supporters and be satisfied with that then all good. Just don’t complain about crowd numbers. Understanding why Melbourne City don’t have decent crowds while WSW does is not rocket science. I know a West Ham supporter who lives in Doncaster (the one in England) who was born in Newcastle. You are more likely to support a local team admittedly, but there’s other influences that drive it too - it’s not prescriptive as a franchise model would have you believe.
Waz. I am not necessarily advocating setting up another franchise. I’m saying that no second club will succeed Long term in SE Qld if it is not geographically separate from Roar. Sure, one may get promoted... but it won’t survive two seasons if it’s only supporters are the 1,500 that came with it from the NPL. Aligning with a community is the easiest way to create an identity.
Has there been a football franchise of any code in the last 50 years that has succeeded without a community identity?
if a second team happens in SE Qld it has to be Ipswich. The city has a long proud football tradition ,it can draw from the ever expanding western corridor, and they hate Brisbane with a passion ..what more could you want ? I agree - a team from Ipswich region would have the best chance of Quickly establishing an identity and a rivalry.
|
|
|
|
|
Roar in me Blood
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 4.6K,
Visits: 0
|
+x+x+x+xThere is another positive in this. If Roar are looking at any move north, be it Dolphin or otherwise, it frees up the whole Sth West of Brisbane for a second team. While Roar were spreading themselves from Redcliffe to Logan it was all a bit confusing. At the moment Roar men are staying at Logan so your predicament still exists.
I also disagree that any side has to represent part of Brisbane and not the whole of Brisbane mind you.
It’s entirely acceptable for a side to represent a geographic segment of Brisbane if that’s who they are, equally it’s acceptable for a side to represent the entire city irrespective of where they’re based, play or train.
I don’t see Liverpool being geographically divided with certain post codes supposed to support red and the other blue and the same in Manchester, whether you support city or United is not based on proximity to stadium or training ground.
It’s an unusually Australian thing, probably an outcome of the franchise models multiple codes run, to think that location means much - that sort of thinking is an inhibitor to proper football culture, as if allegiance is determined by your post code. It isn’t, and it shouldn’t be. If you start local and follow your team up the football pyramid, you can end up with post code determining most of your team's following - as it should be. "Our team" means something in that context. Without P/R (yes, that again) it is a different kettle of fish at the top level for our teams - since teams just appear there without any following growing out of their own roots. Brisbane Roar to me has no postcode base location for 'local' support - just the generic Brisbane/Queensland plus anyone else who wants to follow the best team in the league. Having supporters based on “postcode” actually works against pro/rel because teams are allocated by geography, not ability.
A city needs to be a patchwork quilt of supporters, not something artificially created.
In Tranmere do they support Tranmere Rovers or Liverpool/Everton?
In Stockport do they support County or City/United?
I spent a decade working/playing/coaching at a place called Newark on Trent and no one supported Forest, County or Lincoln City because they were local clubs, most supported Arsenal, United, or Liverpool and had never even been there in most cases.
That’s just football - Australia has to stop telling people who to support and let clubs work harder to attract and keep fans. Totally agree with the patchwork across a city like ours. Which ties in to the thought that a second club would struggle to displace the Roar for membership unless it was someone who was jaded with the Roar or had a reason to not follow them already (like perhaps former Gold Coast fans). But when it comes to the Arsenal, United and Liverpool side of things, being constant and regular in the top flight is more the reason I see for their following. People get asked "who do you follow in the Premier League?" much more than "who do you follow in English Football?". That was how I chose Arsenal many years ago - needed a team to follow for a mates tipping comp and how could you go past Arse in both their team name and their coach's name? Same for us - people might have a local or favoured club, but it is still a question of who they support in the ALeague (if anyone). When it comes to promotion in our environment, who is going to follow Peninsula Power if they got promoted? I expect it is more likely to be those who came from the Redcliffe area or had family/friends playing for the club than anyone South or West who saw them play once and thought 'that's a club I can follow'. Not people being told who to follow - just who they are more likely to have an interest or feel ownership with.
When I wear their colours, I am the club.
|
|
|
|
|
Waz
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 19K,
Visits: 0
|
+x+x+x+x+xThere is another positive in this. If Roar are looking at any move north, be it Dolphin or otherwise, it frees up the whole Sth West of Brisbane for a second team. While Roar were spreading themselves from Redcliffe to Logan it was all a bit confusing. At the moment Roar men are staying at Logan so your predicament still exists.
I also disagree that any side has to represent part of Brisbane and not the whole of Brisbane mind you.
It’s entirely acceptable for a side to represent a geographic segment of Brisbane if that’s who they are, equally it’s acceptable for a side to represent the entire city irrespective of where they’re based, play or train.
I don’t see Liverpool being geographically divided with certain post codes supposed to support red and the other blue and the same in Manchester, whether you support city or United is not based on proximity to stadium or training ground.
It’s an unusually Australian thing, probably an outcome of the franchise models multiple codes run, to think that location means much - that sort of thinking is an inhibitor to proper football culture, as if allegiance is determined by your post code. It isn’t, and it shouldn’t be. If you start local and follow your team up the football pyramid, you can end up with post code determining most of your team's following - as it should be. "Our team" means something in that context. Without P/R (yes, that again) it is a different kettle of fish at the top level for our teams - since teams just appear there without any following growing out of their own roots. Brisbane Roar to me has no postcode base location for 'local' support - just the generic Brisbane/Queensland plus anyone else who wants to follow the best team in the league. Having supporters based on “postcode” actually works against pro/rel because teams are allocated by geography, not ability.
A city needs to be a patchwork quilt of supporters, not something artificially created.
In Tranmere do they support Tranmere Rovers or Liverpool/Everton?
In Stockport do they support County or City/United?
I spent a decade working/playing/coaching at a place called Newark on Trent and no one supported Forest, County or Lincoln City because they were local clubs, most supported Arsenal, United, or Liverpool and had never even been there in most cases.
That’s just football - Australia has to stop telling people who to support and let clubs work harder to attract and keep fans. Totally agree with the patchwork across a city like ours. Which ties in to the thought that a second club would struggle to displace the Roar for membership unless it was someone who was jaded with the Roar or had a reason to not follow them already (like perhaps former Gold Coast fans). But when it comes to the Arsenal, United and Liverpool side of things, being constant and regular in the top flight is more the reason I see for their following. People get asked "who do you follow in the Premier League?" much more than "who do you follow in English Football?". That was how I chose Arsenal many years ago - needed a team to follow for a mates tipping comp and how could you go past Arse in both their team name and their coach's name? Same for us - people might have a local or favoured club, but it is still a question of who they support in the ALeague (if anyone). When it comes to promotion in our environment, who is going to follow Peninsula Power if they got promoted? I expect it is more likely to be those who came from the Redcliffe area or had family/friends playing for the club than anyone South or West who saw them play once and thought 'that's a club I can follow'. Not people being told who to follow - just who they are more likely to have an interest or feel ownership with. Agree. Pro/Rel will help boost following as fans live the drama of promotion, and even the disappointment of failing until eventually they do go up.
Central Coast Mariners would still be drawing close to 10k crowds today had they have gone down and come back up again, instead they are withering at the foot of the table year after year.
Gladiators clearly tried the “we’re not Roar” route when pitching for a licence, even trying the PR stunt of Broich running some clinics - hardly encouraging that two sides can co-exist in Brisbane
and not cannibalise each other’s supporter base.
I still believe expansion should look at Knights or United on the Coast before Brisbane itself, most of Roars corporate backing comes from south of the border and there’s little evidence that corporates in Brissie or the general population are ready to support a second team.
|
|
|
|
|
Waz
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 19K,
Visits: 0
|
+x+x+x+x+x+x+xThere is another positive in this. If Roar are looking at any move north, be it Dolphin or otherwise, it frees up the whole Sth West of Brisbane for a second team. While Roar were spreading themselves from Redcliffe to Logan it was all a bit confusing. At the moment Roar men are staying at Logan so your predicament still exists.
I also disagree that any side has to represent part of Brisbane and not the whole of Brisbane mind you.
It’s entirely acceptable for a side to represent a geographic segment of Brisbane if that’s who they are, equally it’s acceptable for a side to represent the entire city irrespective of where they’re based, play or train.
I don’t see Liverpool being geographically divided with certain post codes supposed to support red and the other blue and the same in Manchester, whether you support city or United is not based on proximity to stadium or training ground.
It’s an unusually Australian thing, probably an outcome of the franchise models multiple codes run, to think that location means much - that sort of thinking is an inhibitor to proper football culture, as if allegiance is determined by your post code. It isn’t, and it shouldn’t be. Tell that to a West Ham or Tottenham supporter. The point is, if Roar represents Brisbane (which incidentally is the largest city by area in Australia) then where does a second club draw supporters from. Everton and Liverpool have a century old heritage (originally there was a religious divide) to draw on. I suppose if you want the second Brisbane team to bring their 1500 club supporters and be satisfied with that then all good. Just don’t complain about crowd numbers. Understanding why Melbourne City don’t have decent crowds while WSW does is not rocket science. I know a West Ham supporter who lives in Doncaster (the one in England) who was born in Newcastle. You are more likely to support a local team admittedly, but there’s other influences that drive it too - it’s not prescriptive as a franchise model would have you believe.
Waz. I am not necessarily advocating setting up another franchise. I’m saying that no second club will succeed Long term in SE Qld if it is not geographically separate from Roar. Sure, one may get promoted... but it won’t survive two seasons if it’s only supporters are the 1,500 that came with it from the NPL. Aligning with a community is the easiest way to create an identity.
Has there been a football franchise of any code in the last 50 years that has succeeded without a community identity?
if a second team happens in SE Qld it has to be Ipswich. The city has a long proud football tradition ,it can draw from the ever expanding western corridor, and they hate Brisbane with a passion ..what more could you want ? I agree - a team from Ipswich region would have the best chance of Quickly establishing an identity and a rivalry. Agree again. And it looks like Ipswich Council are supportive too.
|
|
|
|
|
clockwork orange
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 8.3K,
Visits: 0
|
+x+x+x+x+x+xThere is another positive in this. If Roar are looking at any move north, be it Dolphin or otherwise, it frees up the whole Sth West of Brisbane for a second team. While Roar were spreading themselves from Redcliffe to Logan it was all a bit confusing. At the moment Roar men are staying at Logan so your predicament still exists.
I also disagree that any side has to represent part of Brisbane and not the whole of Brisbane mind you.
It’s entirely acceptable for a side to represent a geographic segment of Brisbane if that’s who they are, equally it’s acceptable for a side to represent the entire city irrespective of where they’re based, play or train.
I don’t see Liverpool being geographically divided with certain post codes supposed to support red and the other blue and the same in Manchester, whether you support city or United is not based on proximity to stadium or training ground.
It’s an unusually Australian thing, probably an outcome of the franchise models multiple codes run, to think that location means much - that sort of thinking is an inhibitor to proper football culture, as if allegiance is determined by your post code. It isn’t, and it shouldn’t be. If you start local and follow your team up the football pyramid, you can end up with post code determining most of your team's following - as it should be. "Our team" means something in that context. Without P/R (yes, that again) it is a different kettle of fish at the top level for our teams - since teams just appear there without any following growing out of their own roots. Brisbane Roar to me has no postcode base location for 'local' support - just the generic Brisbane/Queensland plus anyone else who wants to follow the best team in the league. Having supporters based on “postcode” actually works against pro/rel because teams are allocated by geography, not ability.
A city needs to be a patchwork quilt of supporters, not something artificially created.
In Tranmere do they support Tranmere Rovers or Liverpool/Everton?
In Stockport do they support County or City/United?
I spent a decade working/playing/coaching at a place called Newark on Trent and no one supported Forest, County or Lincoln City because they were local clubs, most supported Arsenal, United, or Liverpool and had never even been there in most cases.
That’s just football - Australia has to stop telling people who to support and let clubs work harder to attract and keep fans. Totally agree with the patchwork across a city like ours. Which ties in to the thought that a second club would struggle to displace the Roar for membership unless it was someone who was jaded with the Roar or had a reason to not follow them already (like perhaps former Gold Coast fans). But when it comes to the Arsenal, United and Liverpool side of things, being constant and regular in the top flight is more the reason I see for their following. People get asked "who do you follow in the Premier League?" much more than "who do you follow in English Football?". That was how I chose Arsenal many years ago - needed a team to follow for a mates tipping comp and how could you go past Arse in both their team name and their coach's name? Same for us - people might have a local or favoured club, but it is still a question of who they support in the ALeague (if anyone). When it comes to promotion in our environment, who is going to follow Peninsula Power if they got promoted? I expect it is more likely to be those who came from the Redcliffe area or had family/friends playing for the club than anyone South or West who saw them play once and thought 'that's a club I can follow'. Not people being told who to follow - just who they are more likely to have an interest or feel ownership with. Gladiators clearly tried the “we’re not Roar” route when pitching for a licence, even trying the PR stunt of Broich running some clinics - hardly encouraging that two sides can co-exist in Brisbaneand not cannibalise each other’s supporter base.
I still believe expansion should look at Knights or United on the Coast before Brisbane itself, most of Roars corporate backing comes from south of the border and there’s little evidence that corporates in Brissie or the general population are ready to support a second team. If there’s no geographic differentiation then pretty much the only thing you have is “we are not them.” Same as MC ... “We’re not Victory“ .... they have nothing else. I agree that a Gold Coast team is more likely to succeed. Of course they would, they’d have a distinct geographical identity.
|
|
|
|
|
Waz
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 19K,
Visits: 0
|
+x+x+x+x+x+x+xThere is another positive in this. If Roar are looking at any move north, be it Dolphin or otherwise, it frees up the whole Sth West of Brisbane for a second team. While Roar were spreading themselves from Redcliffe to Logan it was all a bit confusing. At the moment Roar men are staying at Logan so your predicament still exists.
I also disagree that any side has to represent part of Brisbane and not the whole of Brisbane mind you.
It’s entirely acceptable for a side to represent a geographic segment of Brisbane if that’s who they are, equally it’s acceptable for a side to represent the entire city irrespective of where they’re based, play or train.
I don’t see Liverpool being geographically divided with certain post codes supposed to support red and the other blue and the same in Manchester, whether you support city or United is not based on proximity to stadium or training ground.
It’s an unusually Australian thing, probably an outcome of the franchise models multiple codes run, to think that location means much - that sort of thinking is an inhibitor to proper football culture, as if allegiance is determined by your post code. It isn’t, and it shouldn’t be. If you start local and follow your team up the football pyramid, you can end up with post code determining most of your team's following - as it should be. "Our team" means something in that context. Without P/R (yes, that again) it is a different kettle of fish at the top level for our teams - since teams just appear there without any following growing out of their own roots. Brisbane Roar to me has no postcode base location for 'local' support - just the generic Brisbane/Queensland plus anyone else who wants to follow the best team in the league. Having supporters based on “postcode” actually works against pro/rel because teams are allocated by geography, not ability.
A city needs to be a patchwork quilt of supporters, not something artificially created.
In Tranmere do they support Tranmere Rovers or Liverpool/Everton?
In Stockport do they support County or City/United?
I spent a decade working/playing/coaching at a place called Newark on Trent and no one supported Forest, County or Lincoln City because they were local clubs, most supported Arsenal, United, or Liverpool and had never even been there in most cases.
That’s just football - Australia has to stop telling people who to support and let clubs work harder to attract and keep fans. Totally agree with the patchwork across a city like ours. Which ties in to the thought that a second club would struggle to displace the Roar for membership unless it was someone who was jaded with the Roar or had a reason to not follow them already (like perhaps former Gold Coast fans). But when it comes to the Arsenal, United and Liverpool side of things, being constant and regular in the top flight is more the reason I see for their following. People get asked "who do you follow in the Premier League?" much more than "who do you follow in English Football?". That was how I chose Arsenal many years ago - needed a team to follow for a mates tipping comp and how could you go past Arse in both their team name and their coach's name? Same for us - people might have a local or favoured club, but it is still a question of who they support in the ALeague (if anyone). When it comes to promotion in our environment, who is going to follow Peninsula Power if they got promoted? I expect it is more likely to be those who came from the Redcliffe area or had family/friends playing for the club than anyone South or West who saw them play once and thought 'that's a club I can follow'. Not people being told who to follow - just who they are more likely to have an interest or feel ownership with. Gladiators clearly tried the “we’re not Roar” route when pitching for a licence, even trying the PR stunt of Broich running some clinics - hardly encouraging that two sides can co-exist in Brisbaneand not cannibalise each other’s supporter base.
I still believe expansion should look at Knights or United on the Coast before Brisbane itself, most of Roars corporate backing comes from south of the border and there’s little evidence that corporates in Brissie or the general population are ready to support a second team. If there’s no geographic differentiation then pretty much the only thing you have is “we are not them.” Same as MC ... “We’re not Victory“ .... they have nothing else. I agree that a Gold Coast team is more likely to succeed. Of course they would, they’d have a distinct geographical identity.
Pretty much under the current system. Imagine “Gladiators” or “Strikers” playing out of Suncorp even ... There can’t be a geographic distinction now, Roar represent all of Brisbane in the same way Man Utd represent all of Manchester .... it doesn’t mean there isn’t room for another team, but it does mean we can’t roll back the boundaries and confine Roar to North or south of the river to suit a new team coming in.
|
|
|
|
|
aok
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 2.1K,
Visits: 0
|
+x+xSaw a rumour that the Bakries have have bought Lang Park and will redevelop it into a boutique stadium with a 9,000 pax seating capacity. I wouldn’t believe that one, Suncorp Stadium is Lang Park. Although how good would a stadium like dolphin oval be in town It wasn't serious
|
|
|
|
|
clockwork orange
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 8.3K,
Visits: 0
|
+x+x+x+x+x+x+x+xThere is another positive in this. If Roar are looking at any move north, be it Dolphin or otherwise, it frees up the whole Sth West of Brisbane for a second team. While Roar were spreading themselves from Redcliffe to Logan it was all a bit confusing. At the moment Roar men are staying at Logan so your predicament still exists.
I also disagree that any side has to represent part of Brisbane and not the whole of Brisbane mind you.
It’s entirely acceptable for a side to represent a geographic segment of Brisbane if that’s who they are, equally it’s acceptable for a side to represent the entire city irrespective of where they’re based, play or train.
I don’t see Liverpool being geographically divided with certain post codes supposed to support red and the other blue and the same in Manchester, whether you support city or United is not based on proximity to stadium or training ground.
It’s an unusually Australian thing, probably an outcome of the franchise models multiple codes run, to think that location means much - that sort of thinking is an inhibitor to proper football culture, as if allegiance is determined by your post code. It isn’t, and it shouldn’t be. If you start local and follow your team up the football pyramid, you can end up with post code determining most of your team's following - as it should be. "Our team" means something in that context. Without P/R (yes, that again) it is a different kettle of fish at the top level for our teams - since teams just appear there without any following growing out of their own roots. Brisbane Roar to me has no postcode base location for 'local' support - just the generic Brisbane/Queensland plus anyone else who wants to follow the best team in the league. Having supporters based on “postcode” actually works against pro/rel because teams are allocated by geography, not ability.
A city needs to be a patchwork quilt of supporters, not something artificially created.
In Tranmere do they support Tranmere Rovers or Liverpool/Everton?
In Stockport do they support County or City/United?
I spent a decade working/playing/coaching at a place called Newark on Trent and no one supported Forest, County or Lincoln City because they were local clubs, most supported Arsenal, United, or Liverpool and had never even been there in most cases.
That’s just football - Australia has to stop telling people who to support and let clubs work harder to attract and keep fans. Totally agree with the patchwork across a city like ours. Which ties in to the thought that a second club would struggle to displace the Roar for membership unless it was someone who was jaded with the Roar or had a reason to not follow them already (like perhaps former Gold Coast fans). But when it comes to the Arsenal, United and Liverpool side of things, being constant and regular in the top flight is more the reason I see for their following. People get asked "who do you follow in the Premier League?" much more than "who do you follow in English Football?". That was how I chose Arsenal many years ago - needed a team to follow for a mates tipping comp and how could you go past Arse in both their team name and their coach's name? Same for us - people might have a local or favoured club, but it is still a question of who they support in the ALeague (if anyone). When it comes to promotion in our environment, who is going to follow Peninsula Power if they got promoted? I expect it is more likely to be those who came from the Redcliffe area or had family/friends playing for the club than anyone South or West who saw them play once and thought 'that's a club I can follow'. Not people being told who to follow - just who they are more likely to have an interest or feel ownership with. Gladiators clearly tried the “we’re not Roar” route when pitching for a licence, even trying the PR stunt of Broich running some clinics - hardly encouraging that two sides can co-exist in Brisbaneand not cannibalise each other’s supporter base.
I still believe expansion should look at Knights or United on the Coast before Brisbane itself, most of Roars corporate backing comes from south of the border and there’s little evidence that corporates in Brissie or the general population are ready to support a second team. If there’s no geographic differentiation then pretty much the only thing you have is “we are not them.” Same as MC ... “We’re not Victory“ .... they have nothing else. I agree that a Gold Coast team is more likely to succeed. Of course they would, they’d have a distinct geographical identity.
Pretty much under the current system. Imagine “Gladiators” or “Strikers” playing out of Suncorp even ... There can’t be a geographic distinction now, Roar represent all of Brisbane in the same way Man Utd represent all of Manchester .... it doesn’t mean there isn’t room for another team, but it does mean we can’t roll back the boundaries and confine Roar to North or south of the river to suit a new team coming in.
Yeah, like WSW didn’t work, eh? Even though Sydney represented all of Sydney.
|
|
|
|
|
Waz
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 19K,
Visits: 0
|
+x+x+x+x+x+x+x+x+xThere is another positive in this. If Roar are looking at any move north, be it Dolphin or otherwise, it frees up the whole Sth West of Brisbane for a second team. While Roar were spreading themselves from Redcliffe to Logan it was all a bit confusing. At the moment Roar men are staying at Logan so your predicament still exists.
I also disagree that any side has to represent part of Brisbane and not the whole of Brisbane mind you.
It’s entirely acceptable for a side to represent a geographic segment of Brisbane if that’s who they are, equally it’s acceptable for a side to represent the entire city irrespective of where they’re based, play or train.
I don’t see Liverpool being geographically divided with certain post codes supposed to support red and the other blue and the same in Manchester, whether you support city or United is not based on proximity to stadium or training ground.
It’s an unusually Australian thing, probably an outcome of the franchise models multiple codes run, to think that location means much - that sort of thinking is an inhibitor to proper football culture, as if allegiance is determined by your post code. It isn’t, and it shouldn’t be. If you start local and follow your team up the football pyramid, you can end up with post code determining most of your team's following - as it should be. "Our team" means something in that context. Without P/R (yes, that again) it is a different kettle of fish at the top level for our teams - since teams just appear there without any following growing out of their own roots. Brisbane Roar to me has no postcode base location for 'local' support - just the generic Brisbane/Queensland plus anyone else who wants to follow the best team in the league. Having supporters based on “postcode” actually works against pro/rel because teams are allocated by geography, not ability.
A city needs to be a patchwork quilt of supporters, not something artificially created.
In Tranmere do they support Tranmere Rovers or Liverpool/Everton?
In Stockport do they support County or City/United?
I spent a decade working/playing/coaching at a place called Newark on Trent and no one supported Forest, County or Lincoln City because they were local clubs, most supported Arsenal, United, or Liverpool and had never even been there in most cases.
That’s just football - Australia has to stop telling people who to support and let clubs work harder to attract and keep fans. Totally agree with the patchwork across a city like ours. Which ties in to the thought that a second club would struggle to displace the Roar for membership unless it was someone who was jaded with the Roar or had a reason to not follow them already (like perhaps former Gold Coast fans). But when it comes to the Arsenal, United and Liverpool side of things, being constant and regular in the top flight is more the reason I see for their following. People get asked "who do you follow in the Premier League?" much more than "who do you follow in English Football?". That was how I chose Arsenal many years ago - needed a team to follow for a mates tipping comp and how could you go past Arse in both their team name and their coach's name? Same for us - people might have a local or favoured club, but it is still a question of who they support in the ALeague (if anyone). When it comes to promotion in our environment, who is going to follow Peninsula Power if they got promoted? I expect it is more likely to be those who came from the Redcliffe area or had family/friends playing for the club than anyone South or West who saw them play once and thought 'that's a club I can follow'. Not people being told who to follow - just who they are more likely to have an interest or feel ownership with. Gladiators clearly tried the “we’re not Roar” route when pitching for a licence, even trying the PR stunt of Broich running some clinics - hardly encouraging that two sides can co-exist in Brisbaneand not cannibalise each other’s supporter base.
I still believe expansion should look at Knights or United on the Coast before Brisbane itself, most of Roars corporate backing comes from south of the border and there’s little evidence that corporates in Brissie or the general population are ready to support a second team. If there’s no geographic differentiation then pretty much the only thing you have is “we are not them.” Same as MC ... “We’re not Victory“ .... they have nothing else. I agree that a Gold Coast team is more likely to succeed. Of course they would, they’d have a distinct geographical identity.
Pretty much under the current system. Imagine “Gladiators” or “Strikers” playing out of Suncorp even ... There can’t be a geographic distinction now, Roar represent all of Brisbane in the same way Man Utd represent all of Manchester .... it doesn’t mean there isn’t room for another team, but it does mean we can’t roll back the boundaries and confine Roar to North or south of the river to suit a new team coming in.
Yeah, like WSW didn’t work, eh? Even though Sydney represented all of Sydney. WSW’s are always offered up as an example when expansion is talked about. There’s no doubt they got many things right with Wanderers but some of the factors in their favour weren’t created by the FFA of the club itself. There were 2 million people living in western Sydney, there was a longstanding football heritage including a history of professional football, a third of the population were immigrants many of whom imported a football culture.
And the rivalry western Sydney has with the rest of Sydney is a real one. One half of Sydney looks down on the other, the demographics are markedly different, and the “divide” plays out in politics and the daily news cycle. So it was fertile ground for the introduction of a team to represent the area.
Where in Brisbane does such fertile ground exist?
It’s not in the north/south divide by the river. Both areas have similar demographics with large pockets of wealth and small pockets of poorer suburbs and both exhibit similar voting patterns.
The city is pretty much united behind the City itself, demonstrates well by the love for the Broncos and it’s very hard to carve off a geographic section of the city and say “We’re not really Brisbane, the city doesn’t represent us, we’re north/south/east/west of Brisbane”.
The fertile ground only starts to come in to play when you get out from the city and in to Ipswich (pop 200,000) and Logan (pop 300,000) and maybe the Gold Cost (600,000).
I’m sure if Bob Katter lent his support to a north QLD team it would have legs. But there’s nothing in the City that even resembles what Wanderers had .... so in the same breath we talk about WSW we have to mention Heart because the question is: if another team were introduced in Brisbane would it be more like WSW or Melbourne Heart?
I’d say Melbourne Heart but on steroids.
There isn’t an NPL club with decent crowds in Brisbane, apart from Roar who draw the biggest crowds on average. So Brisbane’s second team will take some work imo - unlike Wanderers who came to life in about 6 months.
|
|
|
|
|
clockwork orange
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 8.3K,
Visits: 0
|
+x+x+x+x+x+x+x+x+x+xThere is another positive in this. If Roar are looking at any move north, be it Dolphin or otherwise, it frees up the whole Sth West of Brisbane for a second team. While Roar were spreading themselves from Redcliffe to Logan it was all a bit confusing. At the moment Roar men are staying at Logan so your predicament still exists.
I also disagree that any side has to represent part of Brisbane and not the whole of Brisbane mind you.
It’s entirely acceptable for a side to represent a geographic segment of Brisbane if that’s who they are, equally it’s acceptable for a side to represent the entire city irrespective of where they’re based, play or train.
I don’t see Liverpool being geographically divided with certain post codes supposed to support red and the other blue and the same in Manchester, whether you support city or United is not based on proximity to stadium or training ground.
It’s an unusually Australian thing, probably an outcome of the franchise models multiple codes run, to think that location means much - that sort of thinking is an inhibitor to proper football culture, as if allegiance is determined by your post code. It isn’t, and it shouldn’t be. If you start local and follow your team up the football pyramid, you can end up with post code determining most of your team's following - as it should be. "Our team" means something in that context. Without P/R (yes, that again) it is a different kettle of fish at the top level for our teams - since teams just appear there without any following growing out of their own roots. Brisbane Roar to me has no postcode base location for 'local' support - just the generic Brisbane/Queensland plus anyone else who wants to follow the best team in the league. Having supporters based on “postcode” actually works against pro/rel because teams are allocated by geography, not ability.
A city needs to be a patchwork quilt of supporters, not something artificially created.
In Tranmere do they support Tranmere Rovers or Liverpool/Everton?
In Stockport do they support County or City/United?
I spent a decade working/playing/coaching at a place called Newark on Trent and no one supported Forest, County or Lincoln City because they were local clubs, most supported Arsenal, United, or Liverpool and had never even been there in most cases.
That’s just football - Australia has to stop telling people who to support and let clubs work harder to attract and keep fans. Totally agree with the patchwork across a city like ours. Which ties in to the thought that a second club would struggle to displace the Roar for membership unless it was someone who was jaded with the Roar or had a reason to not follow them already (like perhaps former Gold Coast fans). But when it comes to the Arsenal, United and Liverpool side of things, being constant and regular in the top flight is more the reason I see for their following. People get asked "who do you follow in the Premier League?" much more than "who do you follow in English Football?". That was how I chose Arsenal many years ago - needed a team to follow for a mates tipping comp and how could you go past Arse in both their team name and their coach's name? Same for us - people might have a local or favoured club, but it is still a question of who they support in the ALeague (if anyone). When it comes to promotion in our environment, who is going to follow Peninsula Power if they got promoted? I expect it is more likely to be those who came from the Redcliffe area or had family/friends playing for the club than anyone South or West who saw them play once and thought 'that's a club I can follow'. Not people being told who to follow - just who they are more likely to have an interest or feel ownership with. Gladiators clearly tried the “we’re not Roar” route when pitching for a licence, even trying the PR stunt of Broich running some clinics - hardly encouraging that two sides can co-exist in Brisbaneand not cannibalise each other’s supporter base.
I still believe expansion should look at Knights or United on the Coast before Brisbane itself, most of Roars corporate backing comes from south of the border and there’s little evidence that corporates in Brissie or the general population are ready to support a second team. If there’s no geographic differentiation then pretty much the only thing you have is “we are not them.” Same as MC ... “We’re not Victory“ .... they have nothing else. I agree that a Gold Coast team is more likely to succeed. Of course they would, they’d have a distinct geographical identity.
Pretty much under the current system. Imagine “Gladiators” or “Strikers” playing out of Suncorp even ... There can’t be a geographic distinction now, Roar represent all of Brisbane in the same way Man Utd represent all of Manchester .... it doesn’t mean there isn’t room for another team, but it does mean we can’t roll back the boundaries and confine Roar to North or south of the river to suit a new team coming in.
Yeah, like WSW didn’t work, eh? Even though Sydney represented all of Sydney. WSW’s are always offered up as an example when expansion is talked about. There’s no doubt they got many things right with Wanderers but some of the factors in their favour weren’t created by the FFA of the club itself. There were 2 million people living in western Sydney, there was a longstanding football heritage including a history of professional football, a third of the population were immigrants many of whom imported a football culture.
And the rivalry western Sydney has with the rest of Sydney is a real one. One half of Sydney looks down on the other, the demographics are markedly different, and the “divide” plays out in politics and the daily news cycle. So it was fertile ground for the introduction of a team to represent the area.
Where in Brisbane does such fertile ground exist?
It’s not in the north/south divide by the river. Both areas have similar demographics with large pockets of wealth and small pockets of poorer suburbs and both exhibit similar voting patterns.
The city is pretty much united behind the City itself, demonstrates well by the love for the Broncos and it’s very hard to carve off a geographic section of the city and say “We’re not really Brisbane, the city doesn’t represent us, we’re north/south/east/west of Brisbane”.
The fertile ground only starts to come in to play when you get out from the city and in to Ipswich (pop 200,000) and Logan (pop 300,000) and maybe the Gold Cost (600,000).
I’m sure if Bob Katter lent his support to a north QLD team it would have legs. But there’s nothing in the City that even resembles what Wanderers had .... so in the same breath we talk about WSW we have to mention Heart because the question is: if another team were introduced in Brisbane would it be more like WSW or Melbourne Heart?
I’d say Melbourne Heart but on steroids.
There isn’t an NPL club with decent crowds in Brisbane, apart from Roar who draw the biggest crowds on average. So Brisbane’s second team will take some work imo - unlike Wanderers who came to life in about 6 months.
Waz, all you’ve done is point out the need for any new club to have a point of difference (or multiple points of difference). The only area you and I differ is that I believe geography/local area has to be the fundamental difference, whereas you believe some such difference can be made up from scratch with a clever marketing campaign. I’m all for the second team being out of the cbd towards Ipswich, Logan or Sunshine Coast - hence my arguing for Roar to not set up academies and training facilities north, south and everywhere else. If you want a one team town, then we’re on the right track. If you want expansion anywhere near Brisbane, then think again.
|
|
|
|
|
Waz
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 19K,
Visits: 0
|
+x+x+x+x+x+x+x+x+x+x+xThere is another positive in this. If Roar are looking at any move north, be it Dolphin or otherwise, it frees up the whole Sth West of Brisbane for a second team. While Roar were spreading themselves from Redcliffe to Logan it was all a bit confusing. At the moment Roar men are staying at Logan so your predicament still exists.
I also disagree that any side has to represent part of Brisbane and not the whole of Brisbane mind you.
It’s entirely acceptable for a side to represent a geographic segment of Brisbane if that’s who they are, equally it’s acceptable for a side to represent the entire city irrespective of where they’re based, play or train.
I don’t see Liverpool being geographically divided with certain post codes supposed to support red and the other blue and the same in Manchester, whether you support city or United is not based on proximity to stadium or training ground.
It’s an unusually Australian thing, probably an outcome of the franchise models multiple codes run, to think that location means much - that sort of thinking is an inhibitor to proper football culture, as if allegiance is determined by your post code. It isn’t, and it shouldn’t be. If you start local and follow your team up the football pyramid, you can end up with post code determining most of your team's following - as it should be. "Our team" means something in that context. Without P/R (yes, that again) it is a different kettle of fish at the top level for our teams - since teams just appear there without any following growing out of their own roots. Brisbane Roar to me has no postcode base location for 'local' support - just the generic Brisbane/Queensland plus anyone else who wants to follow the best team in the league. Having supporters based on “postcode” actually works against pro/rel because teams are allocated by geography, not ability.
A city needs to be a patchwork quilt of supporters, not something artificially created.
In Tranmere do they support Tranmere Rovers or Liverpool/Everton?
In Stockport do they support County or City/United?
I spent a decade working/playing/coaching at a place called Newark on Trent and no one supported Forest, County or Lincoln City because they were local clubs, most supported Arsenal, United, or Liverpool and had never even been there in most cases.
That’s just football - Australia has to stop telling people who to support and let clubs work harder to attract and keep fans. Totally agree with the patchwork across a city like ours. Which ties in to the thought that a second club would struggle to displace the Roar for membership unless it was someone who was jaded with the Roar or had a reason to not follow them already (like perhaps former Gold Coast fans). But when it comes to the Arsenal, United and Liverpool side of things, being constant and regular in the top flight is more the reason I see for their following. People get asked "who do you follow in the Premier League?" much more than "who do you follow in English Football?". That was how I chose Arsenal many years ago - needed a team to follow for a mates tipping comp and how could you go past Arse in both their team name and their coach's name? Same for us - people might have a local or favoured club, but it is still a question of who they support in the ALeague (if anyone). When it comes to promotion in our environment, who is going to follow Peninsula Power if they got promoted? I expect it is more likely to be those who came from the Redcliffe area or had family/friends playing for the club than anyone South or West who saw them play once and thought 'that's a club I can follow'. Not people being told who to follow - just who they are more likely to have an interest or feel ownership with. Gladiators clearly tried the “we’re not Roar” route when pitching for a licence, even trying the PR stunt of Broich running some clinics - hardly encouraging that two sides can co-exist in Brisbaneand not cannibalise each other’s supporter base.
I still believe expansion should look at Knights or United on the Coast before Brisbane itself, most of Roars corporate backing comes from south of the border and there’s little evidence that corporates in Brissie or the general population are ready to support a second team. If there’s no geographic differentiation then pretty much the only thing you have is “we are not them.” Same as MC ... “We’re not Victory“ .... they have nothing else. I agree that a Gold Coast team is more likely to succeed. Of course they would, they’d have a distinct geographical identity.
Pretty much under the current system. Imagine “Gladiators” or “Strikers” playing out of Suncorp even ... There can’t be a geographic distinction now, Roar represent all of Brisbane in the same way Man Utd represent all of Manchester .... it doesn’t mean there isn’t room for another team, but it does mean we can’t roll back the boundaries and confine Roar to North or south of the river to suit a new team coming in.
Yeah, like WSW didn’t work, eh? Even though Sydney represented all of Sydney. WSW’s are always offered up as an example when expansion is talked about. There’s no doubt they got many things right with Wanderers but some of the factors in their favour weren’t created by the FFA of the club itself. There were 2 million people living in western Sydney, there was a longstanding football heritage including a history of professional football, a third of the population were immigrants many of whom imported a football culture.
And the rivalry western Sydney has with the rest of Sydney is a real one. One half of Sydney looks down on the other, the demographics are markedly different, and the “divide” plays out in politics and the daily news cycle. So it was fertile ground for the introduction of a team to represent the area.
Where in Brisbane does such fertile ground exist?
It’s not in the north/south divide by the river. Both areas have similar demographics with large pockets of wealth and small pockets of poorer suburbs and both exhibit similar voting patterns.
The city is pretty much united behind the City itself, demonstrates well by the love for the Broncos and it’s very hard to carve off a geographic section of the city and say “We’re not really Brisbane, the city doesn’t represent us, we’re north/south/east/west of Brisbane”.
The fertile ground only starts to come in to play when you get out from the city and in to Ipswich (pop 200,000) and Logan (pop 300,000) and maybe the Gold Cost (600,000).
I’m sure if Bob Katter lent his support to a north QLD team it would have legs. But there’s nothing in the City that even resembles what Wanderers had .... so in the same breath we talk about WSW we have to mention Heart because the question is: if another team were introduced in Brisbane would it be more like WSW or Melbourne Heart?
I’d say Melbourne Heart but on steroids.
There isn’t an NPL club with decent crowds in Brisbane, apart from Roar who draw the biggest crowds on average. So Brisbane’s second team will take some work imo - unlike Wanderers who came to life in about 6 months.
Waz, all you’ve done is point out the need for any new club to have a point of difference (or multiple points of difference). The only area you and I differ is that I believe geography/local area has to be the fundamental difference, whereas you believe some such difference can be made up from scratch with a clever marketing campaign. I’m all for the second team being out of the cbd towards Ipswich, Logan or Sunshine Coast - hence my arguing for Roar to not set up academies and training facilities north, south and everywhere else. If you want a one team town, then we’re on the right track. If you want expansion anywhere near Brisbane, then think again. I don’t think it’s for Roar not to enter any geographic area of Brisbane, the entire city is their home town so anywhere is fair game.
How a second team enters that environment is then the question - pro/rel takes care if it for me because as a team comes up it will grow and if it’s unsuccessful it gets relegated and licks it’s wounds for a season or two (Roar included in that relegation scenario) and people will be drawn to the club for a variety of reasons - most of which won’t be tangible, more like how the club “makes them feel”.
The debate over a second Brisbane team sits between today and that point in the future when NSD and pro/rel become a reality - should they, could they, how do they get a second team in Brisbane?
I don’t think it can be done by asking Roar to desert part of the city to make space for a new team that’s all, Roar are already drawing support from all over the city so it’s too late and would be insulting to supporters if they were told to ignore a geography.
England is full of Towns and Cities with a bigger club (or two) representing the entire city and smaller clubs fitting in between. That’s Brisbane and it’s second team for me - Roar will be the bigger club (at least to start with) and a smaller club just needs to define itself - and not appeal to disenfranchised supporters of Roar as Gladiators looked to be doing
If QLD had a full pyramid to the HAL with a couple of promotions my club could be in the A-League in theory, if we got there I wouldn’t want us to abandon 70 years of history and say we represent anything other than who we are. I recon we’d get 3k crowds easily and 10k for a derby in the right stadium (we don’t have capacity for more than 3k at the moment) and that should be enough.
|
|
|
|
|
clockwork orange
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 8.3K,
Visits: 0
|
+x+x+x+x+x+x+x+x+x+x+x+xThere is another positive in this. If Roar are looking at any move north, be it Dolphin or otherwise, it frees up the whole Sth West of Brisbane for a second team. While Roar were spreading themselves from Redcliffe to Logan it was all a bit confusing. At the moment Roar men are staying at Logan so your predicament still exists.
I also disagree that any side has to represent part of Brisbane and not the whole of Brisbane mind you.
It’s entirely acceptable for a side to represent a geographic segment of Brisbane if that’s who they are, equally it’s acceptable for a side to represent the entire city irrespective of where they’re based, play or train.
I don’t see Liverpool being geographically divided with certain post codes supposed to support red and the other blue and the same in Manchester, whether you support city or United is not based on proximity to stadium or training ground.
It’s an unusually Australian thing, probably an outcome of the franchise models multiple codes run, to think that location means much - that sort of thinking is an inhibitor to proper football culture, as if allegiance is determined by your post code. It isn’t, and it shouldn’t be. If you start local and follow your team up the football pyramid, you can end up with post code determining most of your team's following - as it should be. "Our team" means something in that context. Without P/R (yes, that again) it is a different kettle of fish at the top level for our teams - since teams just appear there without any following growing out of their own roots. Brisbane Roar to me has no postcode base location for 'local' support - just the generic Brisbane/Queensland plus anyone else who wants to follow the best team in the league. Having supporters based on “postcode” actually works against pro/rel because teams are allocated by geography, not ability.
A city needs to be a patchwork quilt of supporters, not something artificially created.
In Tranmere do they support Tranmere Rovers or Liverpool/Everton?
In Stockport do they support County or City/United?
I spent a decade working/playing/coaching at a place called Newark on Trent and no one supported Forest, County or Lincoln City because they were local clubs, most supported Arsenal, United, or Liverpool and had never even been there in most cases.
That’s just football - Australia has to stop telling people who to support and let clubs work harder to attract and keep fans. Totally agree with the patchwork across a city like ours. Which ties in to the thought that a second club would struggle to displace the Roar for membership unless it was someone who was jaded with the Roar or had a reason to not follow them already (like perhaps former Gold Coast fans). But when it comes to the Arsenal, United and Liverpool side of things, being constant and regular in the top flight is more the reason I see for their following. People get asked "who do you follow in the Premier League?" much more than "who do you follow in English Football?". That was how I chose Arsenal many years ago - needed a team to follow for a mates tipping comp and how could you go past Arse in both their team name and their coach's name? Same for us - people might have a local or favoured club, but it is still a question of who they support in the ALeague (if anyone). When it comes to promotion in our environment, who is going to follow Peninsula Power if they got promoted? I expect it is more likely to be those who came from the Redcliffe area or had family/friends playing for the club than anyone South or West who saw them play once and thought 'that's a club I can follow'. Not people being told who to follow - just who they are more likely to have an interest or feel ownership with. Gladiators clearly tried the “we’re not Roar” route when pitching for a licence, even trying the PR stunt of Broich running some clinics - hardly encouraging that two sides can co-exist in Brisbaneand not cannibalise each other’s supporter base.
I still believe expansion should look at Knights or United on the Coast before Brisbane itself, most of Roars corporate backing comes from south of the border and there’s little evidence that corporates in Brissie or the general population are ready to support a second team. If there’s no geographic differentiation then pretty much the only thing you have is “we are not them.” Same as MC ... “We’re not Victory“ .... they have nothing else. I agree that a Gold Coast team is more likely to succeed. Of course they would, they’d have a distinct geographical identity.
Pretty much under the current system. Imagine “Gladiators” or “Strikers” playing out of Suncorp even ... There can’t be a geographic distinction now, Roar represent all of Brisbane in the same way Man Utd represent all of Manchester .... it doesn’t mean there isn’t room for another team, but it does mean we can’t roll back the boundaries and confine Roar to North or south of the river to suit a new team coming in.
Yeah, like WSW didn’t work, eh? Even though Sydney represented all of Sydney. WSW’s are always offered up as an example when expansion is talked about. There’s no doubt they got many things right with Wanderers but some of the factors in their favour weren’t created by the FFA of the club itself. There were 2 million people living in western Sydney, there was a longstanding football heritage including a history of professional football, a third of the population were immigrants many of whom imported a football culture.
And the rivalry western Sydney has with the rest of Sydney is a real one. One half of Sydney looks down on the other, the demographics are markedly different, and the “divide” plays out in politics and the daily news cycle. So it was fertile ground for the introduction of a team to represent the area.
Where in Brisbane does such fertile ground exist?
It’s not in the north/south divide by the river. Both areas have similar demographics with large pockets of wealth and small pockets of poorer suburbs and both exhibit similar voting patterns.
The city is pretty much united behind the City itself, demonstrates well by the love for the Broncos and it’s very hard to carve off a geographic section of the city and say “We’re not really Brisbane, the city doesn’t represent us, we’re north/south/east/west of Brisbane”.
The fertile ground only starts to come in to play when you get out from the city and in to Ipswich (pop 200,000) and Logan (pop 300,000) and maybe the Gold Cost (600,000).
I’m sure if Bob Katter lent his support to a north QLD team it would have legs. But there’s nothing in the City that even resembles what Wanderers had .... so in the same breath we talk about WSW we have to mention Heart because the question is: if another team were introduced in Brisbane would it be more like WSW or Melbourne Heart?
I’d say Melbourne Heart but on steroids.
There isn’t an NPL club with decent crowds in Brisbane, apart from Roar who draw the biggest crowds on average. So Brisbane’s second team will take some work imo - unlike Wanderers who came to life in about 6 months.
Waz, all you’ve done is point out the need for any new club to have a point of difference (or multiple points of difference). The only area you and I differ is that I believe geography/local area has to be the fundamental difference, whereas you believe some such difference can be made up from scratch with a clever marketing campaign. I’m all for the second team being out of the cbd towards Ipswich, Logan or Sunshine Coast - hence my arguing for Roar to not set up academies and training facilities north, south and everywhere else. If you want a one team town, then we’re on the right track. If you want expansion anywhere near Brisbane, then think again. I don’t think it’s for Roar not to enter any geographic area of Brisbane, the entire city is their home town so anywhere is fair game.
How a second team enters that environment is then the question - pro/rel takes care if it for me because as a team comes up it will grow and if it’s unsuccessful it gets relegated and licks it’s wounds for a season or two (Roar included in that relegation scenario) and people will be drawn to the club for a variety of reasons - most of which won’t be tangible, more like how the club “makes them feel”.
The debate over a second Brisbane team sits between today and that point in the future when NSD and pro/rel become a reality - should they, could they, how do they get a second team in Brisbane?
I don’t think it can be done by asking Roar to desert part of the city to make space for a new team that’s all, Roar are already drawing support from all over the city so it’s too late and would be insulting to supporters if they were told to ignore a geography.
England is full of Towns and Cities with a bigger club (or two) representing the entire city and smaller clubs fitting in between. That’s Brisbane and it’s second team for me - Roar will be the bigger club (at least to start with) and a smaller club just needs to define itself - and not appeal to disenfranchised supporters of Roar as Gladiators looked to be doing
If QLD had a full pyramid to the HAL with a couple of promotions my club could be in the A-League in theory, if we got there I wouldn’t want us to abandon 70 years of history and say we represent anything other than who we are. I recon we’d get 3k crowds easily and 10k for a derby in the right stadium (we don’t have capacity for more than 3k at the moment) and that should be enough.
Ok, all good. If 3000 fans is a good enough crowd to keep a club going and competitive In a national competition, then I’m all in. I’m just not sure it is.
|
|
|
|
|
JiMMM
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 250,
Visits: 0
|
+x+x+xSaw a rumour that the Bakries have have bought Lang Park and will redevelop it into a boutique stadium with a 9,000 pax seating capacity. I wouldn’t believe that one, Suncorp Stadium is Lang Park. Although how good would a stadium like dolphin oval be in town It wasn't serious 😄😄😄, I thought so but I never can tell on these pesky Internet forums
|
|
|
|
|
Waz
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 19K,
Visits: 0
|
+x+x+x+x+x+x+x+x+x+x+x+x+xThere is another positive in this. If Roar are looking at any move north, be it Dolphin or otherwise, it frees up the whole Sth West of Brisbane for a second team. While Roar were spreading themselves from Redcliffe to Logan it was all a bit confusing. At the moment Roar men are staying at Logan so your predicament still exists.
I also disagree that any side has to represent part of Brisbane and not the whole of Brisbane mind you.
It’s entirely acceptable for a side to represent a geographic segment of Brisbane if that’s who they are, equally it’s acceptable for a side to represent the entire city irrespective of where they’re based, play or train.
I don’t see Liverpool being geographically divided with certain post codes supposed to support red and the other blue and the same in Manchester, whether you support city or United is not based on proximity to stadium or training ground.
It’s an unusually Australian thing, probably an outcome of the franchise models multiple codes run, to think that location means much - that sort of thinking is an inhibitor to proper football culture, as if allegiance is determined by your post code. It isn’t, and it shouldn’t be. If you start local and follow your team up the football pyramid, you can end up with post code determining most of your team's following - as it should be. "Our team" means something in that context. Without P/R (yes, that again) it is a different kettle of fish at the top level for our teams - since teams just appear there without any following growing out of their own roots. Brisbane Roar to me has no postcode base location for 'local' support - just the generic Brisbane/Queensland plus anyone else who wants to follow the best team in the league. Having supporters based on “postcode” actually works against pro/rel because teams are allocated by geography, not ability.
A city needs to be a patchwork quilt of supporters, not something artificially created.
In Tranmere do they support Tranmere Rovers or Liverpool/Everton?
In Stockport do they support County or City/United?
I spent a decade working/playing/coaching at a place called Newark on Trent and no one supported Forest, County or Lincoln City because they were local clubs, most supported Arsenal, United, or Liverpool and had never even been there in most cases.
That’s just football - Australia has to stop telling people who to support and let clubs work harder to attract and keep fans. Totally agree with the patchwork across a city like ours. Which ties in to the thought that a second club would struggle to displace the Roar for membership unless it was someone who was jaded with the Roar or had a reason to not follow them already (like perhaps former Gold Coast fans). But when it comes to the Arsenal, United and Liverpool side of things, being constant and regular in the top flight is more the reason I see for their following. People get asked "who do you follow in the Premier League?" much more than "who do you follow in English Football?". That was how I chose Arsenal many years ago - needed a team to follow for a mates tipping comp and how could you go past Arse in both their team name and their coach's name? Same for us - people might have a local or favoured club, but it is still a question of who they support in the ALeague (if anyone). When it comes to promotion in our environment, who is going to follow Peninsula Power if they got promoted? I expect it is more likely to be those who came from the Redcliffe area or had family/friends playing for the club than anyone South or West who saw them play once and thought 'that's a club I can follow'. Not people being told who to follow - just who they are more likely to have an interest or feel ownership with. Gladiators clearly tried the “we’re not Roar” route when pitching for a licence, even trying the PR stunt of Broich running some clinics - hardly encouraging that two sides can co-exist in Brisbaneand not cannibalise each other’s supporter base.
I still believe expansion should look at Knights or United on the Coast before Brisbane itself, most of Roars corporate backing comes from south of the border and there’s little evidence that corporates in Brissie or the general population are ready to support a second team. If there’s no geographic differentiation then pretty much the only thing you have is “we are not them.” Same as MC ... “We’re not Victory“ .... they have nothing else. I agree that a Gold Coast team is more likely to succeed. Of course they would, they’d have a distinct geographical identity.
Pretty much under the current system. Imagine “Gladiators” or “Strikers” playing out of Suncorp even ... There can’t be a geographic distinction now, Roar represent all of Brisbane in the same way Man Utd represent all of Manchester .... it doesn’t mean there isn’t room for another team, but it does mean we can’t roll back the boundaries and confine Roar to North or south of the river to suit a new team coming in.
Yeah, like WSW didn’t work, eh? Even though Sydney represented all of Sydney. WSW’s are always offered up as an example when expansion is talked about. There’s no doubt they got many things right with Wanderers but some of the factors in their favour weren’t created by the FFA of the club itself. There were 2 million people living in western Sydney, there was a longstanding football heritage including a history of professional football, a third of the population were immigrants many of whom imported a football culture.
And the rivalry western Sydney has with the rest of Sydney is a real one. One half of Sydney looks down on the other, the demographics are markedly different, and the “divide” plays out in politics and the daily news cycle. So it was fertile ground for the introduction of a team to represent the area.
Where in Brisbane does such fertile ground exist?
It’s not in the north/south divide by the river. Both areas have similar demographics with large pockets of wealth and small pockets of poorer suburbs and both exhibit similar voting patterns.
The city is pretty much united behind the City itself, demonstrates well by the love for the Broncos and it’s very hard to carve off a geographic section of the city and say “We’re not really Brisbane, the city doesn’t represent us, we’re north/south/east/west of Brisbane”.
The fertile ground only starts to come in to play when you get out from the city and in to Ipswich (pop 200,000) and Logan (pop 300,000) and maybe the Gold Cost (600,000).
I’m sure if Bob Katter lent his support to a north QLD team it would have legs. But there’s nothing in the City that even resembles what Wanderers had .... so in the same breath we talk about WSW we have to mention Heart because the question is: if another team were introduced in Brisbane would it be more like WSW or Melbourne Heart?
I’d say Melbourne Heart but on steroids.
There isn’t an NPL club with decent crowds in Brisbane, apart from Roar who draw the biggest crowds on average. So Brisbane’s second team will take some work imo - unlike Wanderers who came to life in about 6 months.
Waz, all you’ve done is point out the need for any new club to have a point of difference (or multiple points of difference). The only area you and I differ is that I believe geography/local area has to be the fundamental difference, whereas you believe some such difference can be made up from scratch with a clever marketing campaign. I’m all for the second team being out of the cbd towards Ipswich, Logan or Sunshine Coast - hence my arguing for Roar to not set up academies and training facilities north, south and everywhere else. If you want a one team town, then we’re on the right track. If you want expansion anywhere near Brisbane, then think again. I don’t think it’s for Roar not to enter any geographic area of Brisbane, the entire city is their home town so anywhere is fair game.
How a second team enters that environment is then the question - pro/rel takes care if it for me because as a team comes up it will grow and if it’s unsuccessful it gets relegated and licks it’s wounds for a season or two (Roar included in that relegation scenario) and people will be drawn to the club for a variety of reasons - most of which won’t be tangible, more like how the club “makes them feel”.
The debate over a second Brisbane team sits between today and that point in the future when NSD and pro/rel become a reality - should they, could they, how do they get a second team in Brisbane?
I don’t think it can be done by asking Roar to desert part of the city to make space for a new team that’s all, Roar are already drawing support from all over the city so it’s too late and would be insulting to supporters if they were told to ignore a geography.
England is full of Towns and Cities with a bigger club (or two) representing the entire city and smaller clubs fitting in between. That’s Brisbane and it’s second team for me - Roar will be the bigger club (at least to start with) and a smaller club just needs to define itself - and not appeal to disenfranchised supporters of Roar as Gladiators looked to be doing
If QLD had a full pyramid to the HAL with a couple of promotions my club could be in the A-League in theory, if we got there I wouldn’t want us to abandon 70 years of history and say we represent anything other than who we are. I recon we’d get 3k crowds easily and 10k for a derby in the right stadium (we don’t have capacity for more than 3k at the moment) and that should be enough.
Ok, all good. If 3000 fans is a good enough crowd to keep a club going and competitive In a national competition, then I’m all in. I’m just not sure it is. I doubt it is, certainly long term. But that’s kinda the point of pro/rel isn’t it:
My club gets a shot at the big time, we build a squad suitable for promotion, get there and survive for a season or two before inevitably economics forces us back down and we start again this time though we’re a slightly “bigger club” in the second tier able to attract better players, sponsors and media profile.
Think Bournemouth in the EPL, possibly Brentford next season. The thing to get right is to ensure promotion and/or relegation don’t become a death sentence for clubs.
|
|
|
|
|
aok
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 2.1K,
Visits: 0
|
+x+x+x+xSaw a rumour that the Bakries have have bought Lang Park and will redevelop it into a boutique stadium with a 9,000 pax seating capacity. I wouldn’t believe that one, Suncorp Stadium is Lang Park. Although how good would a stadium like dolphin oval be in town It wasn't serious 😄😄😄, I thought so but I never can tell on these pesky Internet forums 😄
|
|
|
|
|
crimsoncrusoe
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 6.9K,
Visits: 0
|
Unfortunately,O'Neil is gone,off to MC...according to The World Game.
I would say that ends Brisbanes chances.
It's sad when we cant keep players we want.
I guess MC and SFC have more appeal these days.
|
|
|
|
|
notarobot
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 733,
Visits: 0
|
+xUnfortunately,O'Neil is gone,off to MC...according to The World Game. I would say that ends Brisbanes chances. It's sad when we cant keep players we want. I guess MC and SFC have more appeal these days. Yep he’s gone
|
|
|
|
|
Waz
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 19K,
Visits: 0
|
+xUnfortunately,O'Neil is gone,off to MC...according to The World Game. I would say that ends Brisbanes chances. It's sad when we cant keep players we want. I guess MC and SFC have more appeal these days. O’Neil was pretty dire up until he went away with the Olyroos - then came back okay.
|
|
|
|
|
clockwork orange
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 8.3K,
Visits: 0
|
Just spotted in Canberra .... a guy in City gear looking for the rest of his team ....
|
|
|
|
|
aok
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 2.1K,
Visits: 0
|
Hopefully Mells, Akbari or a youth team mid take the opportunity that is presented and cement themselves a spot in the starting XI. Moon would certainly be familiar with the potential of O'Neil's replacement.
|
|
|
|
|
Waz
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 19K,
Visits: 0
|
+xHopefully Mells, Akbari or a youth team mid take the opportunity that is presented and cement themselves a spot in the starting XI. Moon would certainly be familiar with the potential of O'Neil's replacement. If Holloway is fit (I know, that’s unlikely) and can start that allows Inman, who we’re playing at 9, to drop back in to the 5 (assuming we stick to 3-5-2) DWH could also start up top, he will probably link better with Scott MCD than he did with ROD. The bigger issue is whether we’ve lost Inman to India in which case we have a bit of a midfield crisis on our hands.
|
|
|
|
|
aok
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 2.1K,
Visits: 0
|
+x+xHopefully Mells, Akbari or a youth team mid take the opportunity that is presented and cement themselves a spot in the starting XI. Moon would certainly be familiar with the potential of O'Neil's replacement. If Holloway is fit (I know, that’s unlikely) and can start that allows Inman, who we’re playing at 9, to drop back in to the 5 (assuming we stick to 3-5-2) DWH could also start up top, he will probably link better with Scott MCD than he did with ROD. The bigger issue is whether we’ve lost Inman to India in which case we have a bit of a midfield crisis on our hands. True and the suggested line-up would probably work well. The lack of depth in the mids is a little concerning. What do we have in the youth that may be able to step up?
|
|
|
|
|
Waz
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 19K,
Visits: 0
|
Roar 3, GC Knights 0 on Tuesday
|
|
|
|
|
miron mercedes
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 2.7K,
Visits: 0
|
+xRoar 3, GC Knights 0 on Tuesday know who scored ?
|
|
|
|
|
Waz
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 19K,
Visits: 0
|
+x+xRoar 3, GC Knights 0 on Tuesday know who scored ? DWH x2 and Corey Brown
|
|
|
|