Re: Who is to blame? : Mon Sep 23, 2013 10:17 am  

bewareshadows wrote:

...I do wonder whether the name London lacks that connect with a set group of Londoners.

Would Barnet Broncos or Tottenham Broncos, even Twickenham Broncos have created more of a brand loyalty? That really is a question for the supporters though not me.

I just think if someone took Saints and called it Lancashire or Mersey Saints, does it loose something from not being specific to where it is...

A subject I have bored various people with over the years. Yes I do think there's something in the lack of a geographic identifier.

*DISCLAIMER* Before the usual suspects jump all over me, no I am not suggesting this is the only thing wrong with the way the club has been run, or that it is a magic bullet for the future (assuming there is a future). *END*

The "London" tag is rather like Oldham, Salford, or Wigan calling themselves "Greater Manchester".
Because "London" has existed as a metropolitan authority for much longer than other places there is a tendency to assume it's a homogenous whole, but it really isn't. Ask anyone in London where they're from, and the one answer you won't hear is "London". At the very least they'll qualify it with "North", "South", "East", or "West", or more likely they'll name a specific suburb. And be under no illusions, many of the London suburbs have as well defined a town centre as any of the towns that make up other conurbations like Greater Manchester, or the West Midlands.

Of course having moved around so much, naming ourselves after a specific suburb wouldn't have made much sense. But "West London Broncos" would have made sense. Even if we'd changed it to "East London Broncos" when we played at Charlton, at least it would have reinforced the fact that we'd moved to the other side of the second most populous city in Europe.

Re: Who is to blame? : Mon Sep 23, 2013 8:28 pm  

Perry wrote:

. But "West London Broncos" would have made sense.

I agree with you 100% Perry.......in fact, I believe a number of posters may have recommended this to the club back in 2011.......and were as usual, ignored

Re: Who is to blame? : Tue Sep 24, 2013 9:46 am  

I disagree strongly, its an interesting subject but I think it is almost completely irrelevant what your name is.

Every major sports team in Berlin is called 'Berlin' (a city of 3.3m people). New York has 2 NFL teams called 'New York'. Some Premier League soccer teams are named after small suburbs of major cities (Aston, Everton). Some Rugby *nion teams are called something very bizarre (Saracens, Harlequins) with no mention of any area or city.

People will identify with a club whatever they are called if they are well run and are stable and successful.

Re: Who is to blame? : Tue Sep 24, 2013 10:12 am  

Like Tre, I disagree strongly with Perry.

Speaking as a proud Londoner, one of the main things that appealed to me when i first started watching the Broncos, was the fact that they represented the whole of London.

I loved supporting THE London team then, and I still do.

If only we could cut the whole of Norf London adrift...maybe call it "The Crapital"?

Re: Who is to blame? : Tue Sep 24, 2013 10:40 am  

North London is where it's at, not even cabbies go south of the river for fear they'll never return alive

Re: Who is to blame? : Tue Sep 24, 2013 10:51 am  

I will concede that North London is nicer than North of Watford.

As far as the demise of LB goes, I have had word today that we still have a chance of playing in SL next year.

Whether we will have enough players to form a team is another matter, but I feel a little more upbeat that things are progressing in a positive manner.

Re: Who is to blame? : Tue Sep 24, 2013 10:59 am  

Dan Stains woz God wrote:

As far as the demise of LB goes, I have had word today that we still have a chance of playing in SL next year.

Can you put a percentage on that?

Wonder if any bookies are offering odds. Must be time for Mark Rammond to be giving betting advice.

Re: Who is to blame? : Tue Sep 24, 2013 11:11 am  

Tre Cool wrote:

New York has 2 NFL teams called 'New York'.

Both located in New Jersey & 45 minutes journey from Manhattan let alone the other boroughs.

Re: Who is to blame? : Tue Sep 24, 2013 11:13 am  

Cowgirl Nostalgist wrote:

Both located in New Jersey & 45 minutes journey from Manhattan let alone the other boroughs.

Paris St Germain do ok being called 'Paris'. Ditto 'Madrid' and 'Milan'.

Don't Washington Redskins play in a different state due to the racial nature of their nickname? I read that the local authorities wouldn't let them build a stadium in Washington unless they changed their name so now they play in Maryland? But are still called Washington.

Re: Who is to blame? : Tue Sep 24, 2013 11:19 am  

Tre Cool wrote:

Ditto 'Madrid' and 'Milan'.

Milan is also the Anglicised version of Milano.

Although Londres Chevals has a nice ring to it.