Quote:
Originally Posted by Cheezel
Just watched 60 minutes in what was a very biased report in favour of AFL. Well I say if AFL want war lets give them war!!!! I am going to boycott anything to do with the AFL and death ride to the game to any body that wants to hear.
If they want war they got one:x
______________
They must: consolidate sydney, focus on the individual fan and not the cumulative fan base. And stick with it against constant flak from super traditionalists and afl media types. The game itself will actually do the rest - draw people in - if we give it the right environment.
thats true for me too....at some points i thought i was watching an afl plug. But I have added more insight here for our fight, and I hope you'd like to read it too, cheezel.
Despite what was said though, none of it was not true - I think rather it was just made to look a more dire fight for rugby league by leaving plenty of cannon flak from league's side out. This just happened to make it a better story for most people. except us.
- I will say this about rugby leagues fight. On image, it will lose with the current set up. And image is a massive thing that can dominate perceptions. Its the first thing us humans look at when sizing something up.
RL does not consider the individual when it comes to image. Whats better for a person in terms of game-day experience? Sitting in a crowd at a modern facility with some 40,000 people adding to the atmosphere? Or sitting in a ground thats fairly old with between 10,000 and 17,000 people?
The former. Its much more exciting and inspiring. Thats AFL's image. Its more impressive and attractive. 12k at manly at an old feild is not impressive and does nothing to make the game attractive - sorry - to people. It serves only to steer people away, apart from the very core, more die-hard fans.
It doesnt matter that 9 sydney teams get 80,000 people over 4 games against afl's 35,000 at one...because people forget that its the individual's experience not the cumulative experience that matters....let me explain further: its a case of "I attended a match with 40,000 other people today." against "I attended a match with 14,000 people today." Everyone on this forum points to the cumulative today as the strength of the game....but when you forget that its individuals that matter, and the individual only thinks like above and is impressed by such....he does not think "I attended a match with 14,000 other people, and thats great, but the greatest thing is the cumulative attendance of rl in this town, it was 76,492 across 5 games." You see, he only takes that 14,000 other people experience, and thats his reality, thats what he sells to other people, thats what he feels....he doesnt feel the other 76,491 people as well. He can only be at one game at once.
He does not think like that. What happens at other games is not his concern when he is at a game with a bad atmosphere/poor facilities/lower crowd and less than what would be experienced elsewhere in another game (if he were comparing both over time and deciding which one he would rather attend more).
thats league's problem with image in general. It can't win at the moment with that. It needs to have games with 30-40,000 people attending. No matter the argument you present, you can't get past that, because otherwise league ISN'T winning or is not effective enough.
Also, the perception that league is more tough on bodies and junior football. Maybe league has a harder sell in this part, but thats all it needs to be: a tougher sell. Its easier for afl to sell its junior footy (and soccer too), as they seem less violent. I dont know if figures were doctored in a recent survey that showed league juniors had less injuries than afl juniors, with afl shoulder and knee injuries being rampant at senior level and all the way down the code.
That is a battle that is harder to win, but is harder not impossible.
In many ways what people fail to appreciate along with all the love for 9 sydney teams, is that too many teams for sydney is too much for the game to take. Image is a huge motivator for parents and people.
What of the person who goes to a game with 40k in a modern facility versus a person who goes to a a game with 12k in the older facility? Who goes away praising the night more? What people fail to see is that word of mouth is a HUGE (and free) advert for a game, an experience, a product. Forget excitement levels just for now, as any game on a one-to-one basis can be unexpectedly exciting or particularly boring (no one knows which before the fact)...and focus on the game-day experience. The better the atmosphere and facilities and ease of attendance and cost, the better the time, and the more recommendations it will get....nothing hits home better in marketing than a personal recommendation from someone you know and trust.
This is a cumulative effect over years that takes place.
I dont care who has the bigger sport, this is more about potentials being reached, and per capita attendance; so at this stage one would have to say AFL has the better game to attend (whether you think afl is good or not) and league the second best (which lets face it, 2nd best at the moment, is losing completely).
So in some regards the 60 minutes story is a perfect reflection over the 20 mins it was on, of the landscape of nrl and afl in sydney.
I know it sounded like an AFL plug, thats because its hard not to plug the AFL at the moment.
***RL could more than ever benefit from a greater match day experience including better facilities, increased praise from word of mouth, more support for juniors in selling the game to the young.***
AFL is not going away. They may try and fail largely with the older generation, but every child they get to play for them is a win in the younger generation, and if its a scale of 100 million dollars for 10,000 kids, that seems ok by them, its something to grow on. Those kids will grow and use word of mouth and actions to grow and establish traditions of afl in sydney.
To me, RL is diminishing, and AFL growing, and the 60 minutes story reflected that strongly. And its just and fair. No probs for me to accept.
Now I have accepted it, i realize more and more that rl needs to get all the things i listed between the *** asterix *** above in full swing. To achieve that end it needs to somehow: reduce teams to ensure greater resources and a wider reach in nsw/other states, move to vastly improved facilities either by building or upgrading or simply moving, and sell the game once more to children with a harder more effective sell. Teams need to average 30k within 10 years just to survive and increase sponsors and members; sponsors by about 2 fold at least and members 10 fold in many cases, and this coupled with a sydney team reduction may well starve off the effects of AFL.
They need to move on this now. As the leagues club funding dries up, the position becomes weaker and weaker for the nrl.
In a nutshell, consolidate sydney, focus on the individual not the cumulative fan base.
Originally Posted by Cheezel
Just watched 60 minutes in what was a very biased report in favour of AFL. Well I say if AFL want war lets give them war!!!! I am going to boycott anything to do with the AFL and death ride to the game to any body that wants to hear.
If they want war they got one:x
______________
They must: consolidate sydney, focus on the individual fan and not the cumulative fan base. And stick with it against constant flak from super traditionalists and afl media types. The game itself will actually do the rest - draw people in - if we give it the right environment.
thats true for me too....at some points i thought i was watching an afl plug. But I have added more insight here for our fight, and I hope you'd like to read it too, cheezel.
Despite what was said though, none of it was not true - I think rather it was just made to look a more dire fight for rugby league by leaving plenty of cannon flak from league's side out. This just happened to make it a better story for most people. except us.
- I will say this about rugby leagues fight. On image, it will lose with the current set up. And image is a massive thing that can dominate perceptions. Its the first thing us humans look at when sizing something up.
RL does not consider the individual when it comes to image. Whats better for a person in terms of game-day experience? Sitting in a crowd at a modern facility with some 40,000 people adding to the atmosphere? Or sitting in a ground thats fairly old with between 10,000 and 17,000 people?
The former. Its much more exciting and inspiring. Thats AFL's image. Its more impressive and attractive. 12k at manly at an old feild is not impressive and does nothing to make the game attractive - sorry - to people. It serves only to steer people away, apart from the very core, more die-hard fans.
It doesnt matter that 9 sydney teams get 80,000 people over 4 games against afl's 35,000 at one...because people forget that its the individual's experience not the cumulative experience that matters....let me explain further: its a case of "I attended a match with 40,000 other people today." against "I attended a match with 14,000 people today." Everyone on this forum points to the cumulative today as the strength of the game....but when you forget that its individuals that matter, and the individual only thinks like above and is impressed by such....he does not think "I attended a match with 14,000 other people, and thats great, but the greatest thing is the cumulative attendance of rl in this town, it was 76,492 across 5 games." You see, he only takes that 14,000 other people experience, and thats his reality, thats what he sells to other people, thats what he feels....he doesnt feel the other 76,491 people as well. He can only be at one game at once.
He does not think like that. What happens at other games is not his concern when he is at a game with a bad atmosphere/poor facilities/lower crowd and less than what would be experienced elsewhere in another game (if he were comparing both over time and deciding which one he would rather attend more).
thats league's problem with image in general. It can't win at the moment with that. It needs to have games with 30-40,000 people attending. No matter the argument you present, you can't get past that, because otherwise league ISN'T winning or is not effective enough.
Also, the perception that league is more tough on bodies and junior football. Maybe league has a harder sell in this part, but thats all it needs to be: a tougher sell. Its easier for afl to sell its junior footy (and soccer too), as they seem less violent. I dont know if figures were doctored in a recent survey that showed league juniors had less injuries than afl juniors, with afl shoulder and knee injuries being rampant at senior level and all the way down the code.
That is a battle that is harder to win, but is harder not impossible.
In many ways what people fail to appreciate along with all the love for 9 sydney teams, is that too many teams for sydney is too much for the game to take. Image is a huge motivator for parents and people.
What of the person who goes to a game with 40k in a modern facility versus a person who goes to a a game with 12k in the older facility? Who goes away praising the night more? What people fail to see is that word of mouth is a HUGE (and free) advert for a game, an experience, a product. Forget excitement levels just for now, as any game on a one-to-one basis can be unexpectedly exciting or particularly boring (no one knows which before the fact)...and focus on the game-day experience. The better the atmosphere and facilities and ease of attendance and cost, the better the time, and the more recommendations it will get....nothing hits home better in marketing than a personal recommendation from someone you know and trust.
This is a cumulative effect over years that takes place.
I dont care who has the bigger sport, this is more about potentials being reached, and per capita attendance; so at this stage one would have to say AFL has the better game to attend (whether you think afl is good or not) and league the second best (which lets face it, 2nd best at the moment, is losing completely).
So in some regards the 60 minutes story is a perfect reflection over the 20 mins it was on, of the landscape of nrl and afl in sydney.
I know it sounded like an AFL plug, thats because its hard not to plug the AFL at the moment.
***RL could more than ever benefit from a greater match day experience including better facilities, increased praise from word of mouth, more support for juniors in selling the game to the young.***
AFL is not going away. They may try and fail largely with the older generation, but every child they get to play for them is a win in the younger generation, and if its a scale of 100 million dollars for 10,000 kids, that seems ok by them, its something to grow on. Those kids will grow and use word of mouth and actions to grow and establish traditions of afl in sydney.
To me, RL is diminishing, and AFL growing, and the 60 minutes story reflected that strongly. And its just and fair. No probs for me to accept.
Now I have accepted it, i realize more and more that rl needs to get all the things i listed between the *** asterix *** above in full swing. To achieve that end it needs to somehow: reduce teams to ensure greater resources and a wider reach in nsw/other states, move to vastly improved facilities either by building or upgrading or simply moving, and sell the game once more to children with a harder more effective sell. Teams need to average 30k within 10 years just to survive and increase sponsors and members; sponsors by about 2 fold at least and members 10 fold in many cases, and this coupled with a sydney team reduction may well starve off the effects of AFL.
They need to move on this now. As the leagues club funding dries up, the position becomes weaker and weaker for the nrl.
In a nutshell, consolidate sydney, focus on the individual not the cumulative fan base.
