Re: Story in Guardian today : Mon Jun 20, 2011 5:29 pm
jaybs wrote:
Yes Dave I accept a lot has changed, but do you really feel however much money is invested next season (if we are awarded a licence in 4 weeks time) that it will work under the Quins brand, I just can't see it happening, the average sports person and young people we need to attract are not seeing the difference in the two brands, we have no USP we need to stand alone with a club name whatever it may be.
A lot has changed? What an understatement. Beyond the obvious arugment about finances, we are also working under a completely different set of quota rules, as well as a restrictive salary cap. These were barely factors in this glorious period of "success" as the Broncos. The desperate failure of the brand is a far more significant consideration as the problems we were faced with then were far more similar to now. Even then we could sign Australian internationals on vast contracts and still go into liquidiation as nobody bothered to turn up and watch us, as most of the time we were useless. Now we are building a far less spectacular team, full of English and local players. Nothing will work overnight, no matter if we are Harlequins or London Broncos. It is pathetic to read about people instantly dismissing the Harlequins brand after 5 years ffs. This is not a 5 year project.
Why do you keep bleating on about the "average sports person" not "seeing the diference in the two brands"? Could you be any more condescending? And just out of interest, do you have ANY evidence to support this claim? What is the "average sports person" anyway?
We have no USP? Sorry to follow The Penguin's tone, but are you for real?
But isn't that a Rugby Union team?
