Any evaluation of the Crushers needs to keep it firmly in mind that they entered the year that the SL war broke out and were closed down by their ARL masters as part of the great compromise. They never had a chance to build a loyal suporter base in the face of an established Broncos outfit and a fast growing Lions. Everything about their existence was tarnished by the war. Pity, it was a good team name.

Leigh.

I've said this before on here, but the Crushers should've been playing at QEII instead of the Broncos. The Crushers were a team who IMO had a future of being the team for outer Brisbane, or the rest of Brisbane, yet they played in the smack middle of the city while the city's 'main' team (Broncos) played about 10km out from the middle.

Any sporting team that has a train for their mascot gets my endorsement.

It also didn't help that the Crushers were a very poorly run club, even if they were far from alone in this regard. Crowd wise they started off pretty well before they dropped off as the team's performances continued to be poor.

To add what I've said regarding local leagues above, another major differences between what happened with to BRL and to the SANFL and WAFL is that at least two former BRL powerhouses- Brothers and Valleys (the latter still holding the record for premiership wins)- are no more while another once successful club in Wests currently don't field a side in the Qld Cup (but could do so in the future). Though the SANFL has seen one merger and the WAFL brought one new club in, at least neither of those has seen clubs die.

http://www.austadiums.com/forum/viewtop ... 7561#17561



My finger slipped.

17,000 average for a competition that covers 3/4 of a population is crap... but 10,000 average for a competition that covers basically the entire Australian population is good (which has not even been achieved yet)... what?[/quote]


Different circumstances. For instance Rugby League has been played professionally for at least 25 years, and most of the clubs around today are at least 7 years old. Compare that to the A-League, the first full professional football competition the nation has ever seen, where most of the clubs are completely new franchises, not even a season old but already averaging over half what the NRL gets through the gates.

If the A-League wanted tv ratings they could have sold it to a FTA station but would have probably had the game raped and abused just like NRL got when it took its broken, battered corpse of a code to Kerry Packer. But rather, the FFA learnt from the mistakes of the past (some of them anyway) and decided they would let the crowds develop first, so that when it does come time to broker a new deal, they will be able to get the terms they want.

After reading most of your posts pcpp, Im going to put my neck out and say that just maybe, you are full of crap.

I dont mind the game of rugby league, i went to half a dozen broncos games last season, but i still can not stand the rampant commercialisation and americanisation that the broncos have embraced. i feel that however much money they have raised by advertising on a players left buttock cheek, they could have earnt from some of the more traditionalist spectators if they had just toned it down a little and made match day more about the game of football rather then the event of going to the football.

It all comes down to tradition v titilation.

You get this view from Birsbane all the time. The Broncos are at an interesting stage in their history. They have been starved of success and with the rise of the Cowboys, they no longer dominate the Queensland landscape. The introduction of the Giold Coast next year throws another spanner into the works. Life has never ben tougher for the Broncos. How they get out of it will be a true test of the club. I think rugby League in Qld will be better in the long term having undergone this period of transition.