Re: I.M.G : Wed Oct 11, 2023 1:01 pm  

This thread is the typical attitude of it’s always someone else’s fault. It’s up to the clubs to build relationships with the communities they sit it, to market, to encourage fans to attend, to make it entertaining. As much as I don’t really like the bloke what DB has done with Leigh is the blue print.

We need the clubs to grab the sport by the balls and send it on an upward trajectory. What we have instead is a load of self perpetuating flat cappers with a few quid holding the game back.

Re: I.M.G : Wed Oct 11, 2023 2:12 pm  

Trainman wrote:

This thread is the typical attitude of it’s always someone else’s fault. It’s up to the clubs to build relationships with the communities they sit it, to market, to encourage fans to attend, to make it entertaining......

......We need the clubs to grab the sport by the balls and send it on an upward trajectory. What we have instead is a load of self perpetuating flat cappers with a few quid holding the game back.

This I can agree with. But it all boils down to money, or lack of it. Marketing is expensive.

But being part of the community doesn't always guarantee everything else will be rosy. Take Castleford as an example - if you go to Cas, you'll see how widespread the support is, and how important it is the people of the town. Yet they are in financial trouble, leaking players, and have a ground that is falling apart around them.

Trainman wrote:

As much as I don’t really like the bloke what DB has done with Leigh is the blue print.

I can't agree with that, though. Yes, he has bought success the past two years and gained some short term interest, but is it sustainable?

The more successful clubs in the competition, both on and off the pitch - think Wigan, Saints, and Leeds, don't follow his blue print of novelty cabaret acts, flamboyant owners hogging the limelight, or relying on spending a fortune building a team from 'mercenary' type players.

Other clubs that have in the past, such as Bradford Bulls, have found out the money suddenly dries up, the players and novelty acts go, and the fans follow. It just isn't a sustainable plan, nor original.

Re: I.M.G : Wed Oct 11, 2023 2:40 pm  

Leeds_Luke wrote:

This I can agree with. But it all boils down to money, or lack of it. Marketing is expensive.

But being part of the community doesn't always guarantee everything else will be rosy. Take Castleford as an example - if you go to Cas, you'll see how widespread the support is, and how important it is the people of the town. Yet they are in financial trouble, leaking players, and have a ground that is falling apart around them.

I can't agree with that, though. Yes, he has bought success the past two years and gained some short term interest, but is it sustainable?

The more successful clubs in the competition, both on and off the pitch - think Wigan, Saints, and Leeds, don't follow his blue print of novelty cabaret acts, flamboyant owners hogging the limelight, or relying on spending a fortune building a team from 'mercenary' type players.

Other clubs that have in the past, such as Bradford Bulls, have found out the money suddenly dries up, the players and novelty acts go, and the fans follow. It just isn't a sustainable plan, nor original.

Cas are seeking to avoid financial trouble rather than being in it. They typically spend what they can afford, they don't have a particularly rich owner and they cut their cloth accordingly.

Re: I.M.G : Wed Oct 11, 2023 7:14 pm  

Leeds_Luke wrote:

This I can agree with. But it all boils down to money, or lack of it. Marketing is expensive.

But being part of the community doesn't always guarantee everything else will be rosy. Take Castleford as an example - if you go to Cas, you'll see how widespread the support is, and how important it is the people of the town. Yet they are in financial trouble, leaking players, and have a ground that is falling apart around them.

I can't agree with that, though. Yes, he has bought success the past two years and gained some short term interest, but is it sustainable?

The more successful clubs in the competition, both on and off the pitch - think Wigan, Saints, and Leeds, don't follow his blue print of novelty cabaret acts, flamboyant owners hogging the limelight, or relying on spending a fortune building a team from 'mercenary' type players.

Other clubs that have in the past, such as Bradford Bulls, have found out the money suddenly dries up, the players and novelty acts go, and the fans follow. It just isn't a sustainable plan, nor original.

Time will tell. We are 2 years inside a 5 year plan, which to me, looks like we are on the right path. You should be worrying about when Leeds will ever find success again.

Re: I.M.G : Wed Oct 11, 2023 9:03 pm  

Cokey wrote:

Time will tell. We are 2 years inside a 5 year plan, which to me, looks like we are on the right path. You should be worrying about when Leeds will ever find success again.

Lol. Leigh have won their first real bit of silverware in 50 years and they think their fans thibk they are a big succesful club. Bless.

Re: I.M.G : Wed Oct 11, 2023 10:09 pm  

Leeds_Luke wrote:

Lol. Leigh have won their first real bit of silverware in 50 years and they think their fans thibk they are a big succesful club. Bless.

Leeds have been $hit for a while now, and their fans still think they will be challenging for honours, and being a big club again. LOL. Bless!!

Re: I.M.G : Wed Oct 11, 2023 10:36 pm  

Cokey wrote:

Leeds have been $hit for a while now, and their fans still think they will be challenging for honours, and being a big club again. LOL. Bless!!

I don't think there is any Leeds fan that wouldn't agree we have been $hit for several years now. But even in those years of being $hit we have won a CC and got to a GF.

Give it a couple of years until your double glazing salesman owner will pull his money out again, and you'll be dropping back down the leagues. We won't be.

Re: I.M.G : Thu Oct 12, 2023 1:04 pm  

Leeds_Luke wrote:

This I can agree with. But it all boils down to money, or lack of it. Marketing is expensive.

But being part of the community doesn't always guarantee everything else will be rosy. Take Castleford as an example - if you go to Cas, you'll see how widespread the support is, and how important it is the people of the town. Yet they are in financial trouble, leaking players, and have a ground that is falling apart around them.

I can't agree with that, though. Yes, he has bought success the past two years and gained some short term interest, but is it sustainable?

The more successful clubs in the competition, both on and off the pitch - think Wigan, Saints, and Leeds, don't follow his blue print of novelty cabaret acts, flamboyant owners hogging the limelight, or relying on spending a fortune building a team from 'mercenary' type players.

Other clubs that have in the past, such as Bradford Bulls, have found out the money suddenly dries up, the players and novelty acts go, and the fans follow. It just isn't a sustainable plan, nor original.

Leigh needed to do something to differentiate their image from Wigan, its odd that two rivals so close play in the same colour with Roman/Warrior themes, so its worked for them in a way it wouldent for most other teams in the league

Re: I.M.G : Thu Oct 12, 2023 1:53 pm  

UllFC wrote:

Leigh needed to do something to differentiate their image from Wigan, its odd that two rivals so close play in the same colour with Roman/Warrior themes, so its worked for them in a way it wouldent for most other teams in the league

I think if Leigh had played in green and yellow, Beaumont would still have changed their name. He wanted to make Leigh HIS club.

I quite like the re-brand. It definitely grew on me as the season progressed. Beaumont has done well out of it. [fimg=][/fimg]But that isn't going to secure the long term future of the club, or even bring anymore success. When the wins stop coming, the fanbase will drop, unless other strategies are brought into place to stop that.

'Hull Sharks' and 'Wakefield Wildcats' saw a brief uptake in interest after their rebrands, but went back to their traditional names after the novelty wore off.

Once the expensive pre-match entertainment I'd dropped, will that affect the footfall? Possibly not, as I can't see many of target demographic of 18-35 year olds being big into bands like T'Pau.

I've no issue with what Leigh have done this year, but I don't see it as future-proofing the club, or having the long term impact people think it will.

Re: I.M.G : Thu Oct 12, 2023 5:00 pm  

Leeds_Luke wrote:

I think if Leigh had played in green and yellow, Beaumont would still have changed their name. He wanted to make Leigh HIS club.

I quite like the re-brand. It definitely grew on me as the season progressed. Beaumont has done well out of it. [fimg=][/fimg]But that isn't going to secure the long term future of the club, or even bring anymore success. When the wins stop coming, the fanbase will drop, unless other strategies are brought into place to stop that.

'Hull Sharks' and 'Wakefield Wildcats' saw a brief uptake in interest after their rebrands, but went back to their traditional names after the novelty wore off.

Once the expensive pre-match entertainment I'd dropped, will that affect the footfall? Possibly not, as I can't see many of target demographic of 18-35 year olds being big into bands like T'Pau.

I've no issue with what Leigh have done this year, but I don't see it as future-proofing the club, or having the long term impact people think it will.

Hull Sharks was never popular, not helped by us being completely skint and bottom of the league. But in Hull a name wasnt needed, if you say you are off to watch Hull its assumed you mean FC (with Football being City) and the black and white irregular hoops was already a strong design.