But branding means nothing without a team on the pitch. Look at Manchester United and, now they're winning things, City. They didn't have to rebrand themselves as non Manchester clubs to get people from all over the UK and the world to support them. They just needed success. In City's case, wealthy owners helped. A "brand" that was an absolute laughing stock has become one of the most successful clubs in the country. No need for a new name, or to drop "Manchester" or "City" from anything. Just a team capable of winning trophies.



If you say so.




I do think it's a good thing. The club's in a much better state than it was under Wilkinson. Doesn't mean you can't find the odd fault, here and there.




I'da agree with that. St. Patrick's day had bugger all to do with us (and it's cack anyway) - something like your suggestion would, actually, be a good idea and have relevance to Salford RLFC. So will it happen? Probably not!



To be fair, I don't think that myself. This only started because I'm fed up of seeing posts dismissing people who do hold such concerns. Although I'm slightly wary of the rebranding, as it does strike me as being like the organisations I mentioned in my previous post. I can understand people's concerns.



Merged clubs aren't the same, though. The culture in Australia, the US and so on is completely different clubs are franchises, moved around at the whim of an owner. When the Brooklyn Dodgers moved to LA, people stopped supporting them. Despite the club shouting about how it was still the same franchise. Franchising is a dangerous thing and doesn't fit into the culture of sporting clubs in this country. Look at the reaction to mooted franchising in rugby league. And ask Gateshead and Sheffield fans what they think of it...



People might, although I doubt the support for such a club would be there. But if the club suddenly became the Manchester Red Devils, or North West Red Devils, I could see quite a few giving up. Again, for reasons mentioned in the previous post. To some, if the club no long represents the City of Salford, then it no longer represents them. That doesn't mean, however, that they have a limp brain. I think your last point on that paragraph is a bit of hyperbole, mind. I think people are appreciative of what's being done, but that doesn't mean they cannot question things. Blind faith is a dangerous thing.



I don't doubt that for a second. But the new image won't sell if the team carries on winning f**k all.



I agree with that. It seems like an oversight on something that so easily could have been done. We wouldn't then be having this discussion.



I think patience is the key, from everyone from MK down to us rank and file supporters. It won't change overnight. I think the only thing that will turn MK off is if he doesn't get his own way and win trophy after trophy after trophy. But it'll take more than marketing, branding and any impact the club name has to get people flocking to the stadium. When he's holding the Challenge Cup aloft on the Wembley pitch? *That* will get them coming through the turnstiles.

Although I appreciate your concerns - and, to be honest, I can't see myself supporting a 'Manchester' team - I think you're in danger of getting a bit Daily Mail and worrying about things that aren't happening. The club are still called Salford Red Devils. It says so on the website, it says so in the fixture lists and it says so in the e-mail I got from the club the other day. I don't think the 'Salford' name appeared on the shirt last year either, but no-one raised any concerns about it.

However, if you really are concerned, you could e-mail Martin Vickers and ask the question. I e-mailed him about something else yesterday and got a reply within hours.

Your reading comprehension must improve: I haven't said that I, personally, have a problem. My initial post was purely aimed at MR and TB dismissing other people so glibly. The rest is just a reasoned debate that's sprung out of said post. That is what a forum is for, no? Discussion?

Compare and contrast:

Any word on 'My Agenda' yet?

I can't seem to find it...

Regardless of the issue of the wording on the playing jersey (none of Brisbane Broncos, South Sydney and North Queensland Cowboys actually have thier name on the badge on the shirt - but they are all much more recognised brands in their markets), in my opinion, "Salford" being absent from branding on general merch [iweakens[/i the brand.

Many fans use merch to show their support and in turn help raise the profile of the club. Who do you think the average person on the streets of Greater Manchester would think somebody supported if they saw them wearing this?

You really can't be serious "two Post", "two much trouble" , "too People" and "two busy".........If I hadn't shaken his hand I'd swear mich was about six years old.

From a purely subjective perspective, I'm not keen on the kit. Aesthetically, it's not the kind of 'classy/classic' design that's likely to appeal to those outside the hardcore and, personally, I don't think it's distinctive enough from last year's shirt to tempt me into buying. FWIW, I think the away shirt is even worse, but that's an entirely personal view. Hopefully they both sell by the bucketload.

Gaining a major player like Under Armour is a huge plus though.

I do have a few issues, however......

1) whilst we're all surely "grateful to still have a club" (as we're constantly reminded) that sentiment shouldn't constantly be used as a means of hushing any dissension. Marwan has indeed saved our club and I, for one, am grateful for that, but that doesn't mean I have to slavishly endorse every single decision made by the club.

2) Personally, I'm ambivalent on a lot of the branding issues, but we dismiss the concerns of those with a stronger attachment to the Salford name at our peril. For many fans, including my dad, Salford RLFC is the only means they have of expressing civic pride; the fact that the team happens to play rugby league is of secondary importance. If the club ceases to represent the city of their birth or - worse still - moves out of the city, they're likely to cut their ties.

The question is: who would replace these disenfranchised supporters?

3) I fully endorse any meaningful attempt to draw in new supporters from across the 'greater Manchester' conurbation. However, we have our work cut out building the profile of the club in Salford first.

For all the money spent and noise generated last year, the 'Red Devilution' was largely a case of preaching to the converted. Rugby League's profile in Salford is as low as it's ever been, the Red Devils 'brand' is largely invisible when you drive around the city and, despite the absence of counter-attractions, there's little attachment to the club in the local communities.

The truth is, we're doing little more to promote the club/the sport now than we were under Wilky/Tarry. Fixing this has to be a priority.


These are my opinions, if this makes me 'negative' so be it.

My pennyworth: I support Salford for several reasons but all have, at their base, that I was born, grew up, educated, and lived for some of my adult life in Salford.
I worked in Oldham and had many links to the club but made it obvious I was first and foremost a Salford fan.
I now work in Stockport but never followed Sale.
I live in Rochdale and have a soft spot for Hornets but again (see Oldham).

I am about to put on a scarf to go home and it says "Salford Red Devils". No one in the building does not know the name of my team. It is not Manchester.

Like many on here, I fear the bean counters deciding to strengthen the Manchester link and replace Salford with Manchester in a hope to sound more attractive. It has been mooted too much; it is not a new idea.
Simply put, it would end my support. I cannot accept such a name change is the same club. It's not a merger, it's a change to link to another city.

I do not see the good doctor moving that way at the moment. I worry his advisors might.

Regardless of whether we agree with them, we simply can't afford to disenfranchise fans like this (and there are plenty of them), particularly when there is no cohesive growth strategy for Manchester anyway.

For those not twitter (don't know how to do proper link to tweets) Martin vickers has tweeted:

@mart_vickers: For those who don't know .....Just teamed up with North Americas second biggest sports retail companies, an exclusive deal in the sport. One of the attractions to our club was the similarities between UA's origins in Baltimore and Salford. And the profile the Club had since Marwan's takeover. As part of the deal UA will actively work with our schools, college and junior clubs in our proud City Salford

The work with schools, colleges and clubs sounds very positive

It certainly sounds positive. I look forward to hearing the details of what it involves.

MV has actually just tweeted that Under Armour is opening a NW office and will be partnering the Colin's community work.

Sounds really encouraging. I've seen comments from other fans saying that a £1million deal has to be rubbish, but that tweet goes a long way into explaining why.

Tbh, it seems some fans of other Clubs will try to find fault no matter what.

shock horror I don't think we are a million miles away in our thinking, just the way we express it.

I've never said people shouldn't find fault, that is the best way too progress to learn from mistakes, what annoys me more is that some people do just seem too want too nit pick. You might not have liked it but I do honestly think if the Doc did bang a load of money away and say there you go safety forever some would find something to whinge about. Constructive criticism is what is required nut just moaning for the sake of it.

I did write too the club once or twice about the St Davids day tie in but got no reply, just wrote to Martin Vickers about it so we'll see what comes of it. I think the getting an ex player down for every game and getting him talking in the bar and a piece about them in the program is a good idea and helps the older fans keep connected with the new face of the club. Does anyone know if Dai Watkins has been to Barton or met the Doc? I would love for him too see the adulation Watkins would get from one and all.

We all know that the RFL went about mergers over here in a half d way, think in Australia they did it much better and franchises in the US work because the owners are very detached from the fans and move for their own self interests.

Everyone knows the best way too make the image of the club better is too win things and I do think within the next few years that will become a reality, that happens and you get bums on seats, more revenue from sponsorship and importantly in my eyes the younger players around look at Salford and think I want too play for them.

I would never advocate blind faith in any respect, just a bit of an allowance until the Doc puts everything right, learns fully about the game (as let's be honest her is very green still) and I'd hope starts too get a little better advice on what too say and when too say it.

I think any fan who thought that we would strong arm our way into the top 6 last year was deluded, I was realistic and thought top 8 was an outside chance, we got a big increase in numbers through the gate, a much improved squad and towards the end of last season a brand of rugby that I want too watch. That is sustainable progression for me. If we are playing in the top part of the let's split the atom complicated trophy next year I will be happy, a semi final in the cup would be enough I'm sure too fire and inspire the Doc even further.

I'm glad you wrote that, as it's pretty much my sentiment. I just couldn't be d this afternoon with the righteous brigade.

No problem are kid.

I did it so you don't have two

Sent by a Wire supporting friend at work!

"Tbh, it seems some fans of other Clubs will try to find fault no matter what."

we getting too much like Wigan?

Quote ="Red John"Compare and contrast: '" Erm, yes. I would have a problem with the club actively distancing itself from Salford. Do I think they are currently doing that? No. Am I overly concerned about the shirt not having Salford on it anywhere? No. Can I understand why other people are wary of the fact? Yes. Quote ="TheButcher"Any word on 'My Agenda' yet? I can't seem to find it...'" Well, you made this post here: viewtopic.php?f=20&t=574648&p=17954793#p17954793 Then, for a devil's advocate, spent an awful lot of time defending your viewpoint. It was then followed by this: viewtopic.php?f=20&t=575651&p=17968820#p17968820 Now, I may be putting 2 and 2 together and getting 3007, but it did read as "well, as far as I'm concerned it'd be the same club regardless and, oh look, the Salford public aren't getting behind us so it wouldn't be a bad thing to drop the name..." Apologies if this isn't the agenda it reads like, but that's how it's all come across. Particularly with the way you like dismiss people who do see the Salford name as all-important. Quote ="Michigan red"shock horror I don't think we are a million miles away in our thinking, just the way we express it.'" Maybe if we didn't dismiss other people's opinions with ridiculous statements straight off the bat, we'd get somewhere. I pretty much agree with the rest of your post, although I still don't think the example of franchising in Australia and the US are good pointers for it being all OK over here. Quote ="TheButcher"I'm glad you wrote that, as it's pretty much my sentiment. I just couldn't be d this afternoon with the righteous brigade. '" Righteous? No. Wanting to debate differing opinions without aiming posts such as your first one on this very thread at people with differing opinions? Yes. Big difference. Anyway, I'll repeat. I don't like the design, I'm not overly fussed about the badge not having Salford on it, although I'd prefer it if it did and I won't be wearing it. Can we move on peacefully, now?

Quote ="Red John"Compare and contrast: '" Erm, yes. I would have a problem with the club actively distancing itself from Salford. Do I think they are currently doing that? No. Am I overly concerned about the shirt not having Salford on it anywhere? No. Can I understand why other people are wary of the fact? Yes. Quote ="TheButcher"Any word on 'My Agenda' yet? I can't seem to find it...'" Well, you made this post here: viewtopic.php?f=20&t=574648&p=17954793#p17954793 Then, for a devil's advocate, spent an awful lot of time defending your viewpoint. It was then followed by this: viewtopic.php?f=20&t=575651&p=17968820#p17968820 Now, I may be putting 2 and 2 together and getting 3007, but it did read as "well, as far as I'm concerned it'd be the same club regardless and, oh look, the Salford public aren't getting behind us so it wouldn't be a bad thing to drop the name..." Apologies if this isn't the agenda it reads like, but that's how it's all come across. Particularly with the way you like dismiss people who do see the Salford name as all-important. Quote ="Michigan red"shock horror I don't think we are a million miles away in our thinking, just the way we express it.'" Maybe if we didn't dismiss other people's opinions with ridiculous statements straight off the bat, we'd get somewhere. I pretty much agree with the rest of your post, although I still don't think the example of franchising in Australia and the US are good pointers for it being all OK over here. Quote ="TheButcher"I'm glad you wrote that, as it's pretty much my sentiment. I just couldn't be d this afternoon with the righteous brigade. '" Righteous? No. Wanting to debate differing opinions without aiming posts such as your first one on this very thread at people with differing opinions? Yes. Big difference. Anyway, I'll repeat. I don't like the design, I'm not overly fussed about the badge not having Salford on it, although I'd prefer it if it did and I won't be wearing it. Can we move on peacefully, now?

Touchy touchy, jib.

Well, you're wrong about any agenda. To even suggest so is pretty stupid. I was voicing opinions (Something that you're keen to defend)

I wasn't referring to you when I tongue-in-cheek said Righteous brigade. But it does show that you are quick to jump the gun on someones post, which is perhaps a little pot calling the kettle black, don't you think?

I think people are reading too much into comments that are just as the Dr would say ' banter ', not agenda.

I don't think anyone as actually said Under Armour being our kit supplier is not a big positive for the club . for all the years we have put up with two-bit kit suppliers or suppliers more suited to Boots or jeans and longed for a recognisable sportwear company.
But people are entitled to say the design isn't to their liking without the thought police dragging us off to room 101 .
typical Salford though that the designs had already been ordered prior to the designs were previewed to the chosen fans board.



to carry on with the Orwellian theme.
I find it bizzare that we have a club policy of increasingly withdrawing ' Salford ' from the branding yet have the word ' Lowry ' on our shirt, a name inextricably linked with Salford despite the fact the artist was born in Manchester. doublethink

To get an idea of the size of Under Armour asa sportswear business they just published the Quarter 3 2014 results below:- .

Some big numbers



but anyone getting giddy over the reported big deal with the 'Red Devils ' , get a eye-full of the deal they struck with Notredame in US college Footy [urlhttp://espn.go.com/college-football/story/_/id/10328133/notre-dame-fighting-irish-armour-agree-most-valuable-apparel-contract-ncaa-history[/url

What most people don't realise in the States is the size and power of the Collegiate system, there is something called the B1G 10 who out sell merchandise wise and regularly fill bigger stadia than the biggest of NFL teams, Notredame isn't in the B1G 10 so you can only wonder what the even bigger colleges/universities make in apparel deals.

According to that story UA have kit deals with 12 college American Footie teams , two of which are in your BIG 10 conference :- Maryland & Northwestern,
the rest of these teams look to be a carve up between Nike & Adidas, interesting.
Your Michigan State team receive $8.2 M a year from Adidas .

See that comment at one point would have got me shot by the in laws/family.

All huge U of M people, the Spartans were about as popular as a fart in a spacesuit.

You can't comprehend the size of college anything over there. I've said it before nothing can prepare you for U of M Wolverines V Michigan State Spartans at the Big House in Ann Arbour.

I know U of M is Adidas and the range is mind blowing, in fact the range of merchandise would blow your mind.