I've always been a bit against a name change. I don't think there is much wrong with London Broncos but I get that if a particular NRL club is heavily behind the takeover, they might not want to have a club named after one of their competition 'rivals' in Australia. I also think London Rugby League is boring and bland and I do think you need a nickname to build more of a brand around. 

Initially, London Hounds sounds bad. I did wonder initially if Canterbury Bulldogs were behind the takeover but I had forgotten that Wimbledon had a dog track at Plough Lane. Now, as much as Hounds sounds rubbish, if it means the club are putting down foundations in South West London and aren't just going to flit around the capital every couple of years, it can only be a good thing. 

Plough Lane had a dog track. London Hares.


We play in Wimbledon. London Orinocos.

As close to Tooting, so London Curry Kings.

Not sure that is true. Castleford are still more Cas than Tigers, Wakefield more than Wildcats, Catalans more than Dragons & I would suggest Wigan more than Warriors. It's all about how you sell it. 

If as suggested elsewhere that the resurfacing of Fatty Wood might of ended NRL interest staying as Broncos might be a moot point.


In tribute to Cliff, didn't he & others shout London London not Broncos Broncos?

So it will be off to the glue factory for Buck and Dusty then.
As an idea,The club could hold a bring your dog to the rugby day.