Surely you haven't inferred from my post that I believe all change has to be good?

"blanket inverse response"...doesn't work correctly in the context of your sentence for one thing(Inverse response to what exactly??), nor has any poster said that all changes are good. Have you selectively picked out small parts of people's responses or are you reading from elsewhere? In this context, blanket means everyone, yet I don't see one person saying all change is good?

Rebranding & change happens within all areas of life, it's called trends. Sometimes it isn't done right with minimal impact, sometimes it has adverse effects, but sometimes it can change things for the better.
In RLs case I believe it was to enhance the brand ala NFL/Basketball/Baseball stylie with an emphasis on getting away from the stereotyped flat clappers names. At a time when kids had so many other options other than RL, trying to make the sport appealing other than what was going on on the field was all important. A 5/6/7/8 year old isn't bothered if his dads team are called rhinos or Wolves, they just see a character associated with the club. there's no real negative effect to the youngsters and older fans won't stop going to games because of a name change (or shouldn't)
I don't see any loss of the essence of a club, the heart is still the same, the generations still hand down tales of days gone by and players who graced TGG.
Stressing about the names is the least of fans or the RFL's worries....

St Helens could never have a nickname other than the Saints, it wouldn't make sense.

As for having remained traditional, we have a new badge (and were rebranded "Saints RL" last year whilst on the road) so we have not been immune to leaning towards a more marketable image.

The fact that Wigan are now called Wigan Warriors does not detract one jot from their history IMO. They are still the same club, just with a camp Warrior mascot running around the pitch for the kids before a game.

It's undeniable that RL "deviated" from its history - of course, this was the purpose and zeitgiest of the SL era. The only problem with this break in lineage from the club's roots was that the era of 1996 didn't come ex nihilio, but was just another "passage of time" - and what we have now 16 years later are a bunch of silly misplaced logos and daft names, which owe nothing to the culture that preceded Super League, and have little relevance to British sporting culture after the initial trend. Of course, nicknames like Chemics, Gallant Youths, Dreadnoughts didn't come out of a vacuum, they [iwere[/i created in just the same way as Rhinos, Bulldogs, Wildcats were - except these former nicknames came with the infancy of the clubs themselves and possessed relation to the community, and had a direct narrative of meaningful discourse between language and the abstract.

Now, whether if this important or not, it's up to you. If you appreciate history and meaningful ties which language connects and points to things, then it'll probably be important. But, if you don't, then I guess that's more in line with the spirit of [ithese [/itimes.

Why couldn't St Helens be called the St Helens Cardinals or something along those lines? Like many people have said on this thread, we have just got used to it, and so would Saints. As for the small re branding, that is a nice bit of work St Helens have done there, nothing has been compromised that would offend fans, but like you say, it has given them a more marketable image.



Of course not, I don't think this re branding has or will detract from a clubs history, it just doesn't suit some clubs IMO, and is not something to shout from the rooftops about as an adult. Wigan have dodged the bullet of having a Warrior as part of their badge at least.

I hate getting stick from my football loving mates banging on about Bradford Cowboys Red Sox Bulls vs Leeds Rhinos Mavericks, some of them just think it's hilarious how 'Super' League is branded and won't take the sport seriously because it has that dumbed down feeling surrounding it. They even give me stick about the play off system being used to determine champions of the league, but then some will say they actually enjoy watching the sport. As much as I disagree mostly with what they say, its hard to deny that is how the sport is perceived by many.

And some of us who watched Tommy McCue, Tommy Shannon, Nat Silcock, Duggie Greenall, Eric Ashton, have decided not to "die off" as you tactically put.

If you want to say whose fault it was, that some of our heritage has been rubbed out, look no further than Maurice Lindsay, who in the words of Don Fox "is just an effing bookie".

What gets me is why animals were chosen as brand names. There was nothing wrong with Trinity for Wakefield and Hull Kingston Rovers had a good sound to it.

In Widnes, Warrington will always be "Wire" no matter what they call themselves.

On a different note, it's interesting that on April 1st 1974 a government spokesman once said about the county boundary changes that "The new county boundaries are administrative areas, and will not alter the traditional boundaries of counties, nor is it intended that the loyalties of people living in them will change despite the different names adopted by the new administrative counties." 38 years since it is quite clear, that the [inames of things[/i in an official capacity does ultimately lead to the dilution of former names, and modes of being, no matter how much the generation affected prattles on about them being otherwise. You will ultimately get to a point where the name "Wire" will be as antiquated as sixpence, and codpiece to the successive unaffected generations.

And whilst we're at it, the ITV Quiz Show "The Chase" had a question, "Which Rugby League team plays at the Gratton Stadium?". Enough said.

And thus in 1895 RFL became a sport that would not sit on its merits, but would embrace change and move with the time.

If you dont like change then i suggest watching the onions

I agree. It's not 1996 anymore, and we're not American or Australian. So, bye bye Wildcats? No. Ridiculous excuse.

Its up to the club and there fans, As Bren2k says his Kids identify with Wildcats so why change it? Im a Cas fan and love "Tigers" my kids ref to going to a match as "going to watch the Tigers play" cant see them buying back into the "Glassblowers"

I think I have the wrong sport. Where is the Rugby League for adults?

The adults are not being distracted by name calling or mascots

If we don't capture their interest as kids it's much harder to capture their interest when they're adults.

Kids have massive social pulls towards football and games consoles (& the nationally pushed sports of Union, cricket & tennis). If RL doesn't actively market itself to kids then there won't be any adults watching in 30 years time because they'll all be watching football, Union or cricket.

Psychologically speaking don't you grow-up to be embarrassed of what you enjoyed as a kid? It may have an inverse effect, where once a lad becomes a 16 years old - the little cutesy Wildcats may hold less appeal, than something which has a more grown-up sensibility. Besides, to appeal to kids, RL doesn't have to patronize them with nihilistic arbitrariness, at the expense of meaning, and the wider dignity of the sport, right?