Should The Western Bulldogs Be Re-Branded Footscray?

[Pepsczi Kohler]

The name was changed from Footscray partly because Smorgon et al were ashamed of being attached to the suburb. As for this nonsense about appealing to a wider range of people in the western suburbs, there's a ton of Collingwood fans in the west as well as Essendon, Carlton, Richmond fans etc. The majority of people go for one of the teams their folks barracked for, and they're not going to change because all of a sudden it's not called Footscray anymore. And ot give credit where it's due, North fans kept chanting 'North Melbourne; even when they'd dropped that name, whereas the Bulldogs cheersquad has toed the corporate line.

Great site which sums up a lot of the arguments for and against the name change
http://www.fnwb.com.au/

 

[Brown Dawg]

A lot of people from the west come from non footy orientated families. Thats what the dogs were targeting. Lots of people from the west are people who migrated to aust without knowing what footy is about.

What would you expect from collingwood supporters. Runs in the family. From generation to generation u start to get lots of inbreeding.

 

[Martyn_30_]

There's nothing to be gained by changing back to Footscray.

 

[chesson]

being the AFL and not the VFL, western is WA in my book....

Footscray for the win

I'm on the Yes wagon.

 

[Adelaide Hawk]

Everyone calls them Bulldogs or Footscray anyway, so why not?

 

[Adelaide Hawk]

There's nothing to be gained by changing back to Footscray.

Unfortunately, there was nothing to be gained by changing it in the first place.

 

[zachary]

The original change was thought up by marketing gurus in the 80's who thought it would broaden their support among people of the Western Suburbs. So has it? It's been decades. Have they done any surveys? I think that whenever clubs mess with their name/jumper/song they are start to lose their identity which can lead to extinction. By trying to broaden their support they dilute it. Remember football is tribal.
Their only flag was won as Footscray, and they still have FFC on the back of their jumpers. Stop stuffing around and change it back.

 

[Dimenhydrinate]

The original change was thought up by marketing gurus in the 80's who thought it would broaden their support among people of the Western Suburbs. So has it? It's been decades. Have they done any surveys?

Most people from around here already have their own clubs. I follow Carlton, and I have friends and family who follow Hawthorn, North, Richmond and Collingwood, as well as the Bulldogs.

 

[tribey]

my little nephew goes for the doggies because he thinks theyre a third WA team, bring back Footscray!

I know a Scottish bloke who's lived here for 40-odd years who thinks they're from Perth as well.

 

[Dc9798]

From a marketing point of view, Western Bulldogs sounds a lot better than Footscray, and since 1996 their membership has tripled so I guess it's working.

 

[tribey]

From a marketing point of view, Western Bulldogs sounds a lot better than Footscray, and since 1996 their membership has tripled so I guess it's working.

Since 1996 almost all of the Victorian clubs' membership numbers would've tripled or just about - it wasn't seen as the annual be-all and end-all like it is today.

Just googled. Collingwood had just the 20000 members in 1996, for instance.

 

[mcgarnacle]

this is really trivial issue in the AFL. names are simply a marketing tool these days. if people are going to get technical, just call all Melbourne teams by their mascot name. they all play out of docklands or jolimont. due to this all the clubs have become generic and attract support throughout the entire metro area anyway. this 'representing' an area BS within Melbourne is garbage. the community attachment to a club doesnt appear as strong amongst Melbourne AFL clubs as it is with Sydney NRL clubs. clubs are even abandoning their communities as training bases, let alone not playing within them. collingwood @ melbourne park, soon-to-be melbourne at casey, and also, st kilda will be basically an hour away from the suburb of their name at seaford.

if you really want an example of clubs representing areas, check out the football league system in England. clubs named after cities, towns, city districts, suburbs, etc, must play ALL home games after the area of their name. even teams who arent named after a region, but are synonmous with an area, (such as Arsenal and the borough of Islington in London), must seek to find venues within their district if they want to host matches in a bigger capacity arena. obviously, they also value the 'home & away concept' more than the AFL does, and their league system also demands it. still, it puts into question the integrity of the home & away season and comp in general when interstate teams have a genuine advantage in 10 or 11 of their home games, whereas Melbourne clubs only get it when they hosting an interstate side.

just make sure they keep wearing those white shorts so we all know who is supposed to be hosting who.

 

[Zvim]

It is up to their members and supporters, what I think is irrelevant. If they like the new branding then power to them.

 

[incubi]

I dont see what we would gain from reverting back?
The clubs whole marketing campaign is aimed at the whole of the western suburbs.
It would cost ammounts we cannot afford to change back, all the merchandise, signage, letterheads, logos etc. all have western bulldogs on it.
By what i can see we are doing just fine with the name western bulldogs, membership is at what is a high level for us, financially we are far better off and we're getting funding from all levels of government building facilities for the whole of the western suburbs to use.

 

[Dogs_R_Us]

It is up to their members and supporters, what I think is irrelevant. If they like the new branding then power to them.

Exactly.

What business is it of supporters of other clubs? This "poll" is a farce. The yes vote is made up of votes from jealous rivals who'd like to send us back to the bad old battler days so they can feel superior to us (which they are most definitely NOT).

 

[krisholio14]

Unfortunately, there was nothing to be gained by changing it in the first place.

There is a claim that sponsors refused to get on board because of the negative connotations of the name 'Footscray'.

That's fair enough, but if i'm not mistaken the Dogs still have a fair amount of problems getting sponsors to part wth their money. Maybe not as much as 10 years ago, but still moreso than most other clubs.

Bottom line for me is that the name 'Western Bulldogs' is purely window dressing. If the Dogs had been a powerhouse club with the name Footscray, no way they would have bothered to change it.

They could easily change it back too, and instead of going for a cosmetic adjustment image wise, become a genuine force on the field instead. They are well placed right now to do this.

It's just always struck me that there seems to be a certain amount of 'shame' associated with the name Footscray, but rather than work to turn that image around, it's just easier to change the name.

Having said all this, if Footscray had gone for something like 'Western Suburbs Bulldogs' or just 'Western Suburbs' then I could handle it.

The thing that really pisses me off about the change though, is that its set off a whole lot of local clubs calling themselves 'Eastern' this and 'Northern' that. I know this also partly came from the under 18's comp, but nothing like a team in the national comp to really set things off, kind of like the Eagles did by bunging an animal on the front of their jerseys, and Port with Teal and those infernal lightning bolts.

I also seem to remember back in the 80's, when St Kilda was in the midst of 5 spoons in 6 years, that there was an effort then to rebadge the club as the 'Southern Saints'. It didn't take hold, they went back to just calling themselves St Kilda, and they've ended up surviving ok didn't they?

 

[krisholio14]

Exactly.

What business is it of supporters of other clubs? This "poll" is a farce. The yes vote is made up of votes from jealous rivals who'd like to send us back to the bad old battler days so they can feel superior to us (which they are most definitely NOT).

You're just being paranoid there.

 

[krisholio14]

this is really trivial issue in the AFL. names are simply a marketing tool these days. if people are going to get technical, just call all Melbourne teams by their mascot name. they all play out of docklands or jolimont. due to this all the clubs have become generic and attract support throughout the entire metro area anyway. this 'representing' an area BS within Melbourne is garbage. the community attachment to a club doesnt appear as strong amongst Melbourne AFL clubs as it is with Sydney NRL clubs. clubs are even abandoning their communities as training bases, let alone not playing within them. collingwood @ melbourne park, soon-to-be melbourne at casey, and also, st kilda will be basically an hour away from the suburb of their name at seaford.

if you really want an example of clubs representing areas, check out the football league system in England. clubs named after cities, towns, city districts, suburbs, etc, must play ALL home games after the area of their name. even teams who arent named after a region, but are synonmous with an area, (such as Arsenal and the borough of Islington in London), must seek to find venues within their district if they want to host matches in a bigger capacity arena. obviously, they also value the 'home & away concept' more than the AFL does, and their league system also demands it. still, it puts into question the integrity of the home & away season and comp in general when interstate teams have a genuine advantage in 10 or 11 of their home games, whereas Melbourne clubs only get it when they hosting an interstate side.

just make sure they keep wearing those white shorts so we all know who is supposed to be hosting who.

It's interesting how we do these things in certain places here.

Like the WAFL, where West Perth plays in Joondalup (way up in the Northern suburbs), and East Perth and Subiaco play at West Perth.

I went to the Cards last game at Leederville in 1993 and at the time they were going to call themselves Joonadlup when they moved. Except their members said no ****ing way.

Then you've got South Adelaide in the SANFL. They hadn't played in South Adelaide for decades until they moved to Noarlunga, which while it is not South Adelaide the suburb, it IS south of Adelaide. Well South of Adelaide (and for some Sa footy fans, not south enough lol). They moved out of town essentially, but ended up more South than they had been previously (when they played home games at Adelaide Oval, in North Adelaide).

I guess the point i'm making is that it seems in footy over the last 20 or 30 years that in an endevour to be more professional and make more coin, names, locations, jerseys etc don't seem to have a whole lot of correlation any more for most clubs.

 

[Rooface]

The name was changed from Footscray partly because Smorgon et al were ashamed of being attached to the suburb.

Really? Poor reason.

Thats sad being ashamed of who you play for. I dont buy it.

 

[aneale]

Footscray. I think the Western Bulldogs was a rather silly name anyway, I would have thought Western Melbourne, or West Melbourne would have made more sense thatn just 'Western', particulary with West Coast, of course now it looks like we weill have Greater West Sydney. Mess.

 

[D Mitchell]

....

Bottom line for me is that the name 'Western Bulldogs' is purely window dressing. If the Dogs had been a powerhouse club with the name Footscray, no way they would have bothered to change it.

... It's just always struck me that there seems to be a certain amount of 'shame' associated with the name Footscray, but rather than work to turn that image around, it's just easier to change the name.

I also seem to remember back in the 80's, when St Kilda was in the midst of 5 spoons in 6 years, that there was an effort then to rebadge the club as the 'Southern Saints'. It didn't take hold, they went back to just calling themselves St Kilda, and they've ended up surviving ok didn't they?

Valid points, all. Frankly, reasons to be embarrassed. How soft. Entrenced lack of success ? Don't bother working to overcome it (to be fair, the club has done the hard yards), just market it up.

 

[ManUtd]

Yeah Western Bulldogs is rubbish. What the hell does Western mean? Western what? Ok we all know what it refers to, but its still ambiguous. Although Footscray has to be one of the worst sounding suburbs in Melbourne. Nonetheless, they're Footscray based, and they should really be called it

 

[Dazb86]

By and large Footscray is referred to as one of the shittiest suburbs in Melbourne. It probably gets the biggest run on street talk out of all suburbs. It is known for it's junkies and rough types. People don't call it footscrazy for nothing.

I wouldn't mind changing back at all but from a club perspective it is probably smarter to stay as the western bulldogs. The western suburbs of melbourne is growing rapidly with ALOT of immigrants in the area. These are the people we are targeting for new supporters as we all know it's hard to change a family tie in terms of getting kids to support your side.

If we manage to win a premiership in the next few years I think the name change will work out quite well.

Besides they still sell footscray merchandise for the members at the bulldogs stands anyway.

 

[FootyJunkie]

In 1989, it looked like either Fitzscray or Footszroy.

 

[Perry Pie]

I started this thread by voting "yes" to revert back.
I have read the comments now and it seems to me that the club supporters in the forum want to keep with the western bulldogs. Its not my team, I dont like it, but in the end its none of my business. So stick with western bulldags.