If this has been discussed recently, I apologise, I couldn't see a relevant thread.

Basically all I want to know is how important or relevant you think the 'super league era' nicknames are eg. Rhinos, Giants etc. Do you think they're an important part of a club's 'brand', maybe help attract younger fans or would you rather see a return to the likes of Trinity, Northern etc?

Considering saints didn't bother, hull dropped theirs and two newish clubs (quins and celtic) have each taken a different option, what do you think about them in general, and in the context of your own club? Any thoughts appreciated.

I like em.
There have been a couple of poor ones Ie. Hull but they've since been dropped.
Usually the mascots are based on them and it does give a sense of branding. For me they stay.

What I wouldnt like is what they have for the NRL when you see games listed as 'Bulldogs V Raiders'. Something like 'Wildcats V Reds' doesn't do it for me

I don't think ours was poor as such, just the execution was poor (the Shark was about as scary as a goldfish!) that combined with a turquoise colour, some awful shirts, and more importantly an awful time on the field meant it was doomed.

if our form was good most of the cynics would have been won over IMO

that said we have built our crowds and club up without a brandname, but for clubs like Bradford it has most definitely worked.

I have never referred to any club including my own by their "SL nickname." I just don't like them, most of them were badly thought out and rushed to suit the new Super League.

I worked with a bloke who had been going to watch FC since the mid-50's and he stopped when they changed to Hull Sharks, he said 'I support Hull FC, not a f'kin fish'

Some like them, some don't, I hope Rovers never jump on the bandwagon and become Hull Kingston Robins. I thought the change back to Hull FC was a great decision, I might not support them, but I firmly believe thats who they are.

Wigan fans have advocated for years that we be changed back to Wigan RL rather than Warriors.

They're a joke. It'd be a great day for the sport if all clubs decided to drop these pathetic cringeworthy names such as Vikings, Bulls, Wildcats, Giants etc.

Does anyone actually refer to their teams as such?

I Think Leeds Are Getting More Commonly Known As "The Rhinos" Due To There Success On The Pitch...

They do at Wakefield and they're all young kids who have grown up with the name, personally I refer to them as Wakey and most people around the area know who I'm talking about, but the Wildcats brand has been a big positive for the club in marketing it to the youngsters around the district and that is probably what most clubs do with their nicknames.

The 'Wildcats or Trinity' argument is a perrennial debate on our board, but most agree that there is room for both, the older end refer to the club as Trinity but recognise that the Wildcats name aids the club in bringing in new younger fans.

Is that by the fans though or by the fans though or in the media? Reading posts from Leeds fans on here near enough all of them refer to them simply as Leeds.

Read on hear or the unofficial forum ages ago that when Nick Halafihi was Chief Executive he actually wanted to change our name to Hull Kingston Raiders!

This is common in American sport, too. The geographic identifier is used just as much.