Re: Story in Guardian today : Sat Jun 18, 2011 6:04 pm  

Moe Lester wrote:

Good marketing for the first game as the "new" London Broncos is surely going to bring in the crowds.

What makes you think that? Good marketing for the current Quins is surely just as likely as it'll probably be (much) the same set of players as at present. If they win the next 9 games, then yes, numbers will be up. If normal service is resumed, then no, they won't. No matter what colour of shirt is on their backs.

Re: Story in Guardian today : Sat Jun 18, 2011 6:52 pm  

For me, the name Harlequins is too closely related to the Union team, and gives no indication of a locality.
Play at the Stoop and wear the Harlequins colours if you want, but why not just call yourselves 'London RL'? No need for the Broncos bit. Gradually these tags will disappear. It's really only Eddie and Stevo who refer to them now.

Re: Story in Guardian today : Sat Jun 18, 2011 7:20 pm  

The "missing thousands" returning is the most hilarious quote I've read on here for ages - the difference in crowds as Broncos and as Quins RL is negligable. The "relaunching as a new club for a boost" quote is equally hilarious - for God's sake, how many times must we "relaunch", it makes no difference to our crowd figures. If we're London Broncos playing out of the Stoop next year, great! If we're Quins RL playing at the Stoop next year - equally great.

Does anyone seriously expect large numbers of people will come out to watch the Broncos next year (if that's what we'll be) with the same players as this year? A change of name doesn't make any difference, it's about quality of players on the pitch.

Re: Story in Guardian today : Sat Jun 18, 2011 7:37 pm  

G.Price Fan Club wrote:

How is that a fair system. Does the RFL do that for clubs up north? Not on your nelly! So why should Quins/London be any different?

Can you see why northern fans get miffed about the help you get? Blackpool were left to die, Leigh have been allowed to be ripped to shreds financially by their council- both problems could have been resolved with the kind of financial support some of your fans seem expect from the RFL.
If you can't produce players and get a decent level of interest then that's your problem, no ours. Sort it yourselves. If that means time out from SL so be it, that's what the RFL would prescribe for anyone else.

As will the rest of the RFL. I doubt anything will work though. RL has no place in the south of England. If you want real RL move up north! Otherwise enjoy your RU!

Flat cap alert!

Re: Story in Guardian today : Sat Jun 18, 2011 9:54 pm  

Smooth Stu wrote:

For me, the name Harlequins is too closely related to the Union team, and gives no indication of a locality.
Play at the Stoop and wear the Harlequins colours if you want, but why not just call yourselves 'London RL'? No need for the Broncos bit. Gradually these tags will disappear. It's really only Eddie and Stevo who refer to them now.

Harlequins will always be first and foremost a Union club, I never bought into it for RL for that reason - it has been almost impossible to generate our own identity with their name and colours so for me the possibility of a name change to London ? is great news. From what I hear there may be difficulties with re-using the Broncos name due to Denver Broncos ? trademarking it, so London RL would work fine for me. I don't think the name Broncos appeared on the shirt badge so we could probably use the old crest no problem. I look forward to further developments on this story!!

Re: Story in Guardian today : Sat Jun 18, 2011 9:58 pm  

G.Price Fan Club wrote:

How is that a fair system. Does the RFL do that for clubs up north? Not on your nelly! So why should Quins/London be any different?

Can you see why northern fans get miffed about the help you get? Blackpool were left to die, Leigh have been allowed to be ripped to shreds financially by their council- both problems could have been resolved with the kind of financial support some of your fans seem expect from the RFL.
If you can't produce players and get a decent level of interest then that's your problem, no ours. Sort it yourselves. If that means time out from SL so be it, that's what the RFL would prescribe for anyone else.

As will the rest of the RFL. I doubt anything will work though. RL has no place in the south of England. If you want real RL move up north! Otherwise enjoy your RU!

thanks for popping in. now, unless you have documented proof of the "HELP WE GET" do us a favour and crawl back from whence you came

Re: Story in Guardian today : Sun Jun 19, 2011 6:34 am  

We're Quins - live with it or lose even more fans, constant changing name, colours and location will do us no good. Get the team right (which it was yesterday) get the crowds up and stand up and be Harlequins RL based at the Stoop in London

Re: Story in Guardian today : Sun Jun 19, 2011 6:58 am  

Ah, there's nothing like friendly banter over the North/South divide!

Re: Story in Guardian today : Sun Jun 19, 2011 7:59 am  

just_jillie wrote:

We're Quins - live with it or lose even more fans, constant changing name, colours and location will do us no good. Get the team right (which it was yesterday) get the crowds up and stand up and be Harlequins RL based at the Stoop in London

Hear, Hear!

Re: Story in Guardian today : Sun Jun 19, 2011 8:22 am  

The problem as I see it with the Quin's is that they've never really settled on either an identity or a home. Despite being in existance since 1980 in one form or another and in the top flight since 1996 you've always looked a bit uncomfortable with who you are and what you're supposed to be.

Are you a marketing tool for the game designed to show that they game can expand, survive and appeal outside it's heartland or are you a proper club that deserves to be judged on it's own merits? Personally I think there is no denying the fact that you were introduced into SL purely as a marketing gimmick along with PSG and Gateshead Thunder as the RFL had a moment of madness with the launch of 'SL Europe'. Unlike the other two clubs you managed to survive the fact that there was limited support for the game in London and be relatively successful, unfortunataly you didn't seem to be able to build on this success and get the fans to really make a success of what is now a franchise.

Personally I thought the idea of linking yourselves to Harlequins was a good idea at the time, giving you the opportunity to market yourself as a club and the sport under a recognised brand and develop 'Harlequins' into a larger sporting club rather than being two seperate entities. Unforunately that hasn't really worked for you (just has it hasn't for Leeds Rhinos and Leeds Tykes/Carnegie) and if anything it's watered down your identity even more. If you'd had success on the pitch it might have been different (at Bradford the whole 'Bulls' concept really took off when we started to really compete - it's harder to be cynical when you're winning!)

Whatever your board decide to do next needs to be something they stick with as jumping from one identity to another and one ground to another is definately not doing you any good! Building a club,an identity and a fanbase is no different to building a brand in any other business. Once you get known it makes no sense to keep changing it in the hope that the casual supporter can keep up. Again, looking at it from a marketing and sponsorship point of view (for yourselves rather than the game as a whole), I'd say that having London in the name would be a positive and allow you to appeal to a larger fan base rather than limiting by associating with another club or borough with its own loyalties and rivalries (at least until another London club is ready for SL to provide you with a local rival!) Do you go back to 'Bronco's'? I never had any affection for the name myself but you had your most successful period under that name so why not? My personal choice would have been for you to go back London Crusaders but that names being buggered up by someone else at the moment! London Eels?