I know there's no way of knowing for sure but perhaps we did lose some fans by becoming Quins but also gained some new ones. Now if the disullisioned fans return due to the new brand etc and the new fans from the Quins era remain (and I don't see why any wouldn't) then we could be in line for a boost in attendances could we not?

You might want to try a regression analysis of average attendance versus win % over the SL era. I think that will tell you everything you need to know.

we were more successfull in the 6 seasons before 2006 with 2 trips to the play-offs and we averaged 3,546 per game.

Since the start of the 2006 season we averaged 3,596 and have never finished higher than 7th.

Crowds at the Stoop, whilst disapointing, are not down to the name of the club and to a certain extent, not badly influenced by the performance of the team either.

Yes, some die hard anti-unionites will have stopped coming since 2006, but the fact remains, we have been better supported since 2006 than we were before it.

GF-Since it appears success and names dont make much difference could you give us the av crowds at each stadium-ie what were we getting at the Stoop previously

The differences you are talking about there could be down to random variation. Statistically, there does not appear to be any effect of time on our crowds.

This statement renders your whole argument completely laughable IMO. How can a club's results have absolutely no bearing on its popular and media profile? Explain. Do the British newspapers focus on Manchester United and Liverpool because the public like teams who play in red?

If people couldn't bring themselves to cheer on a team called Harlequins RL that's down to two things - a substandard marketing effort by the club and IMO downright fickleness (is that a word?) on the part of some supporters. I started supporting the club as Broncos and overcame my initial scepticism about the Quins idea to become a season ticket holder. If some fans can't see the bigger picture, then IMO that's their problem, not the club's.

So now we have another name change, and the horrible (and discredited) idea of 'on the road' fixtures. Congratulations, you've dragged us back 6 years. Thanks.

The Penguin and a few others will never change their opinions whatever case and however strong it is that is a fact of life.

Pengy have you considered that the "on the road" games maybe testing the water given the club has mentioned a potential move away from the Stoop.

A day out in Brighton isnt that bad is it- Hearts in Scotland was a problem!

I take it you are one of the "few others" jaybs?

Exactly! On the road games at Griffin Park were forced on us as the pitch was always having to be re-seeded, these games could be a way of taking our club and RL in general to other parts of the South and exposing (ooh err!) them to it! Never know, it might even bring a few new fans in!

So where would we go? Leyton Orient? Millwall? Brighton?

I don't see the benefit in playing in empty grounds just for the sake of going somewhere new.

I wonder whether this road trip thing has been forced on us as part of the RFL's development deal (or maybe Quins want rid of us for a couple of games).

Can't see the benefit to our club and I think it could be detrimental to ST sales, as any waverers will think sod it, not going to bother as we've only got 11 home games (and I'll get some freebies in the ES anyway).

Personally, I could live with 1 road game (and would enjoy a jolly-up in Brighton) but I think missing two home games is a but much, tbh.

Guess we may find out more at the FF.

If someone puts a case I will listen to it. The repeated folly of rebranding and renaming and moving every few years has got us not very far forward in 30 years. We may be strengthening the squad a bit for next season but if all the money being thrown at this by yet another chief exec trying to put his stamp on us were to be spent on further players or (with gritted teeth in homage to GF) on marketing that to me would make far more sense.