2016 Crowd Watch

[T-Boon]

Storm draw similar crowds to Sydney NRL clubs.
Swans draw similar crowds to Melbourne AFL clubs.
AR playing fields have always been twice the size of RL, the stadiums have always been twice the size and the crowds have always been twice the size. And that might never change no matter what either code does in the future.

I think the higher AFL crowds is linked to the the amount of points scored (and possibly also to the length of the game).

There is a correlation between points scored and crowds. So says the NFL who change their rules when points decline because when points decline crowds decline.

AFL crowds themselves have declined over the last 15 years at a time when coaches have employed more and more defensive strategies and points per game have dropped.

Likewise in NRL crowds have declined since the wrestling tactics have taken hold and points have dropped off by 8 points per game since 2002 when it was 48.24. This equates to less excitement. Add to that the removal of the biff (obviously right call in my opinion) and shoulder charges and there is less to get excited about at the ground.

One thing the NRL should look at is a cluster of rule changes to get on top of the wrestle and get the average points scored per game up from 41 to more like 55-60. The real obstacle to doing this is that the current coaches oppose it just as they do in the AFL because, of course, they want the status quo otherwise they get taken out of their comfort zone and someone else might take their job.


"Each game should provide a maximum of entertainment, the maximum number of plays per game that will be exciting to the audience" ..NFL rules committee

"If someone wants to accuse the NFL of promoting offence to make the game more exciting, [the committee] believes the league should plead guilty" From a 2012 NFL Competition Committee report.

 

[Hoofhearted]

I think the higher AFL crowds is linked to the the amount of points scored (and possibly also to the length of the game).

There is a correlation between points scored and crowds. So says the NFL who change their rules when points decline because when points decline crowds decline.

AFL crowds themselves have declined over the last 15 years at a time when coaches have employed more and more defensive strategies and points per game have dropped.

Likewise in NRL crowds have declined since the wrestling tactics have taken hold and points have dropped off by 8 points per game since 2002 when it was 48.24. This equates to less excitement. Add to that the removal of the biff (obviously right call in my opinion) and shoulder charges and there is less to get excited about at the ground.

One thing the NRL should look at is a cluster of rule changes to get on top of the wrestle and get the average points scored per game up from 41 to more like 55-60. The real obstacle to doing this is that the current coaches oppose it just as they do in the AFL because, of course, they want the status quo otherwise they get taken out of their comfort zone and someone else might take their job.


"Each game should provide a maximum of entertainment, the maximum number of plays per game that will be exciting to the audience" ..NFL rules committee

"If someone wants to accuse the NFL of promoting offence to make the game more exciting, [the committee] believes the league should plead guilty" From a 2012 NFL Competition Committee report.

I think one word contradicts your arguement, soccer.

 

[RoosTah]

I think one word contradicts your arguement, soccer.

Yep. Wanderers crowds shit on the Giants, plus of course there's Europe and South America...

Ultimately crowds are - pure and simple - about tribalism and attachment. The NRC has a lot more tries than Super Rugby, but it's a lower level comp with little attachment and so no one cares, turns up or watches on TV.

If the points = crowds theory had any water, the entertainment factor would see people tuning in much more, but they've already cut teams

 

[T-Boon]

I think one word contradicts your arguement, soccer.

It is the NFL Rules Committees argument...I just think it could apply to Rugby League. It appears to when you look at the comparisons between crowds and points over the last 30 years.
I think it probably applies to soccer as well. Increase the number of goals and you would increase the crowds.

 

[T-Boon]

Yep. Wanderers crowds shit on the Giants, plus of course there's Europe and South America...

I think the NFL rules committee point/crowds philosophy is more about converting the existing fans of a code from couch fans to game attending fans...At the time they first looked at the comparison they were also trying to grow the NFL in comparison to college football.

Soccer getting good crowds around the world doesn't disprove the NFL rules committee theory. I think the theory says that the A-League across the board would get bigger crowds if there were more goals scored per game.

 

[T-Boon]

"If the points = crowds theory had any water, the entertainment factor would see people tuning in much more, but they've already cut teams

If the NFL rules committee theory didn't hold any water then it is strange that they believe so fiercely in it - I mean they would have put a lot of thought into it.

I am stone cold certain that if NRL points per game halved to 20 (i.e. scores of around 12 to 8) then the crowds would fall away dramatically. Thats the theory in play right there.
If points went up to an average of 55 per game I am confident the crowds would go up significantly.

 

[RoosTah]

I think the NFL rules committee point/crowds philosophy is more about converting the existing fans of a code from couch fans to game attending fans...At the time they first looked at the comparison they were also trying to grow the NFL in comparison to college football.

Soccer getting good crowds around the world doesn't disprove the NFL rules committee theory. I think the theory says that the A-League across the board would get bigger crowds if there were more goals scored per game.

To be honest it kinda does disprove it to an extent... if the world's most popular sport is one where games often end in 0-0 or 1-1 draws you could reasonably mount the argument that lower scoring games generate better crowds and the NFL'a success wouldn't disprove it if we follow your logic.

In my view what a game really needs to engage with fans is to be ENGAGED. That's what the NRL and its clubs don't do as well as the AFL

 

[T-Boon]

: The NRC has a lot more tries than Super Rugby, but it's a lower level comp with little attachment and so no one cares, turns up or watches on TV.

If the points = crowds theory had any water, the entertainment factor would see people tuning in much more, but they've already cut teams

Thats not the theory - if it were then the NFL argument would be that high school football games would get bigger crowds than the NFL because they tend to be higher scoring. Thats clearly not the NFL rules committee theory.

The theory is that the NFL will get higher crowds with high points scoring than the NFL will get with low point scoring.

It is an NFL comparison with itself.

It definitely applies to Rugby League and I think it explains (at least in part) why League crowds are low compared to AFL when you factor in that they are equal in terms of TV interest.

 

[T-Boon]

In my view what a game really needs to engage with fans is to be ENGAGED. That's what the NRL and its clubs don't do as well as the AFL

I don't disagree that the clubs need to engage the fans better. But that involves the clubs being smarter which I am not going to hold my breath for because they are super dumb.

The reason the NFL rules committee approach of "promote offence because more points equals more crowds" is worth looking at is that it kind of leaves the clubs out of it and is really simple to implement - you just change some rules to favour offence.

It also means that for any given spot on the club/fan engagement spectrum the crowds will be higher.

 

[RoosTah]

I don't disagree that the clubs need to engage the fans better. But that involves the clubs being smarter which I am not going to hold my breath for because they are super dumb.

The reason the NFL rules committee approach of "promote offence because more points equals more crowds" is worth looking at is that it kind of leaves the clubs out of it and is really simple to implement - you just change some rules to favour offence.

It also means that for any given spot on the club/fan engagement spectrum the crowds will be higher.

I've gone in circles with you a bit mate and probably haven't needed to. I don't entirely disagree with the notion the game needs to get rid of the wrestle and promote more positive play; I would definitely love to see that and think it could help give a little bump in interest, but from all my experience with different sports I'm don't think it's quite as big a factor in the attendance problem as you make out

 

[Raiderdave]

Yea the Shark's small fan base, sure showed they were small last night.

The Raiders non poker machine revenues will surpass their poker machine monies on the very near future.
They may not own GIO stadium but have a property port folio & assets valued way in excess of that silly little goat track the Sharks own.

To attempt to compare the present financial situations of the the 2 clubs is laughable.
One is a V8 Commodore
The other is still a Datsun 180b

 

[T-Boon]

I've gone in circles with you a bit mate and probably haven't needed to. I don't entirely disagree with the notion the game needs to get rid of the wrestle and promote more positive play; I would definitely love to see that and think it could help give a little bump in interest, but from all my experience with different sports I'm don't think it's quite as big a factor in the attendance problem as you make out

All good. I am also not completely convinced it is totally right for the NRL (though it does check out - crowds have dropped since the wrestle took over whilst they were growing pretty well before hand along with points per game).

I am really just obsessed with the NRL getting better crowds than the AFL especially in Sydney. It messes with my head that the Swans get 35k crowds.

 

[RoosTah]

All good. I am also not completely convinced it is totally right for the NRL (though it does check out - crowds have dropped since the wrestle took over whilst they were growing pretty well before hand along with points per game).

I am really just obsessed with the NRL getting better crowds than the AFL especially in Sydney. It messes with my head that the Swans get 35k crowds.

I feel your pain mate lol.

The NRL is heading down the right track I think, but it's really a multilayered issue that will require action on things like infrastructure as well.

In my view the change to a captain's challenge will help the spectacle as the game will benefit from limiting the indecisive and inconsistent nature of video refs, but plenty more needs doing.

 

[TheFrog]

To attempt to compare the present financial situations of the the 2 clubs is laughable.
One is a V8 Commodore
The other is still a Datsun 180b

Shitboxes both, then?

 

[Perth Red]

For NRL and one of the smallest clubs a very good crowd last night. Well done sharks fans, for all the sht I put on the Sharks I genuinely hope you all have a great experience and generate many fond memories of the occasion at the GF. Nothing like seeing the club you love run out in a final.

Now come on Storm!

 

[Mister M]

The only real advantage AFL has is those 5 clubs in melbourne with a rusted on 60,000 + membership base, they are what drive the whole competition, basically... all the off shoot teams have been basically subsidised by this hard core group of about 300,000 melbournites..

if we had that base in Sydney for NRL, we would be number 1 code by a long way..

Really??

Let's look at 4 interstate (non-Victorian) interstate sides average home crowds in 2016.
-Adelaide 47,056
-Port Adelaide 39,665
-West Coast Eagles 36,545
-Fremantle 31, 416.

That's four AFL clubs outside of Victoria that get average crowds that the NRL envy and can only dream about. 15 AFL clubs average more than 20,000 fans to home games this season. How many can do it in the NRL? 1?

Even if the NRL had the 'hard core' group in Sydney that the AFL does in Melbourne it will still struggle to match the AFL in crowds. A major reason for that is that the NRL doesn't understand what the fans want at games.

Give me the set up and the 'fan interaction' of a Storm home game (ie. Round 26 vs The Sharks) over the stupid fan interaction we got at the first final Vs the Cowboys. AAMI Park games should be focused on the Storm and include great initiatives like our pre-game 'black out', instead of silly 'decibel' crowd cheers for both teams, especially when you can't tell the difference between Cowboys and Storm supporters when everyone is yelling anyway.

 

[Miller was a legend]

The Raiders non poker machine revenues will surpass their poker machine monies on the very near future.
They may not own GIO stadium but have a property port folio & assets valued way in excess of that silly little goat track the Sharks own.

To attempt to compare the present financial situations of the the 2 clubs is laughable.
One is a V8 Commodore
The other is still a Datsun 180b

You really are a shit merkin of epic proportions Dave.

Why don't you worry about tonight's game instead of dick measuring contests

 

[Timmah]

Ah yeah
Dave did nothing of the sort
And tonight proved nothing

End of

Bahahahaha you're hilarious.

 

[Warriors Fever]

I think the higher AFL crowds is linked to the the amount of points scored (and possibly also to the length of the game).

There is a correlation between points scored and crowds. So says the NFL who change their rules when points decline because when points decline crowds decline.

AFL crowds themselves have declined over the last 15 years at a time when coaches have employed more and more defensive strategies and points per game have dropped.

Likewise in NRL crowds have declined since the wrestling tactics have taken hold and points have dropped off by 8 points per game since 2002 when it was 48.24. This equates to less excitement. Add to that the removal of the biff (obviously right call in my opinion) and shoulder charges and there is less to get excited about at the ground.

One thing the NRL should look at is a cluster of rule changes to get on top of the wrestle and get the average points scored per game up from 41 to more like 55-60. The real obstacle to doing this is that the current coaches oppose it just as they do in the AFL because, of course, they want the status quo otherwise they get taken out of their comfort zone and someone else might take their job.


"Each game should provide a maximum of entertainment, the maximum number of plays per game that will be exciting to the audience" ..NFL rules committee

"If someone wants to accuse the NFL of promoting offence to make the game more exciting, [the committee] believes the league should plead guilty" From a 2012 NFL Competition Committee report.

Yeah because basketball is the most popular sport in the world

 

[T-Boon]

AAMI Park games should be focused on the Storm and include great initiatives like our pre-game 'black out',

What is the pre game blackout?