It would have been quite difficult to borrow a great white.

Pays the mascot's salary, I suppose, and I understand the thinking. However, marketing to this age group means little if they can't be retained. I was always less than convinced by the claim of some Hudds fans that playing Sunday afternoons was great in that regard. Yes, they might have attracted, say, 300 young kids that otherwise wouldn't have gone but how many of those translate into paying spectators a decade down the line? Whereas the Friday night clubs appealed, I felt, more to an older audience (often with a shandy or two inside them) that appreciated a slightly edgier experience - and offered a more immediate return in financial terms (yes, yes, yes, they could/can be a total pain in the ). Not ideal, I concede, but dumbing the whole thing down to infantile levels does run the risk that the kids attracted in that way simply outgrow that experience.

Although I'm happy that Wakefield have gone back to Trinity I absolutely disagree that the names are a waste of time.
The very fact that Rhinos, even if there are none in Leeds, is such a powerful brand proves its case.
If you pick a good one and actually market it correctly it can be invaluable.

I prefer the Broncos to Harlequins that's for sure. Broncos isn't a bad name. When they re branded post Harlequins it was put out to the fans what they wanted the club to be called. I suspect it was influenced by the owner as his number plate is L13 RFC!

As a Leeds fan I think the Rhinos (or at least I did when it first case in) was a bit rubbish, however...

The suggestion they should get rid now after 20 odd years of doing a very good job at building brand equity up is utterly ridiculous. Both the Rhinos and Bradford Bulls showed how to market these 'monikers' correctly.

You are right to say that The Bulls (and Rhinos) got the marketing right and unfortunately that's what its all about these days.
We have Meerkats advertising insurance and clowns advertising burgers etc, etc.

The long and short of it is that some were done well and have gone on to be excellent brands, whilst others have been awful.

I'm certainly happier without the "wildcat" name being included at Trinity.
The mascott is great but the name was truly cringeworthy, just as Blue Sox, Sharks (Hull), Giants and others are/were.

I'm probably a little old fashioned but, proper clubs, with proper names seems right. We're talking about Rugby League clubs here, not under 7's dance troupes.

Personal opinion but, the modern world is far too bothered about style over substance and while we're at it, I'd much rather see some junior rugby on the pitch at half time than a bunch of dancers. Progress eh.

Agree with the original post, glad my club has never bothered with silly animal names. Perhaps it works for some clubs but I'm sure if a poll of fans were done the majority would be in favour of going back to traditional names.

As we have seen in recent years letting people decide by polls /democracy does not work, somethings are better left to people who no more about how to run the game/clubs. pretty sure if there was a national poll to bring back hanging, it would win, but does not make it the right thing to do does it. After all the Naziz were elected, people buy Coldplay and Justin Bieber records. and 90% of northern people don't like change.

Would it? It would if you only polled people of a certain age. How many people under 30 do you really think would be bothered?

Do you mind your club being nicknamed The Robins? What’s the big difference between having an animal nickname and just having it in your full name?

I think the animal name is neither here nor there. Its how you market your club. Bulls and Rhino's did it fantastically with their "monikers"
Some clubs have done fantastic without.

To use Wakey as an example. Wildcats was a disaster. Not only the name (which as others have said seemed like a cheerleader squad name) but also they tried pleasing everyone by keeping Trinity. So they never really committed to it. The Bulls brand would never have worked if we were Bradford Northern Bulls.

I like how they've branded around just Trinity now. The logo and branding etc is very slick and cool. But equally it could have been a disaster if they made it too traditional and looking old fashioned.

The monikers don't make the sport look bad. It's a tool that can be used to create a brand. Equally you can create a brand without the monikers. The problem has been recently, the clubs and the sport have been utterly hopeless and marketing their brands. Hence why attendances are falling.

Many clubs do/have done surveys to fans so it'd simply be to gauge public opinion during the process of rebranding. Hope this helps

I always though Wakefield should have stuck to trinity or ditched it full stop, like you say its half d. i actually thought Wakefield Tridents had a ring to it.