Club Support - 4 Tiers of the NRL

[docbrown]

A thought has crossed my mind today. Both the AFL and English Soccer refer to having Big 4 clubs - these are the clubs that get the biggest attendances, making the most money and attract the biggest TV ratings.

What you are about to read has a high degree of bullsh*t in it (!!!) - so don't act all surprised. But I think there are current 4 different types of clubs in the NRL competition today. They are:

THE ALPHAS - The NRL Equivalent of the Big 3 and likely to remain so for forseeable future

1. BRISBANE BRONCOS - home and away average of 25.6k, 1 city, proxy state support and massive TV exposure

2. ST GEORGE ILLAWARRA DRAGONS - h & a avg of 20.5k, 2 cities and massive TV exposure

3. CANTERBURY BULLDOGS - h & a avg of 18.8k, large home crowds, large part of 1 city and massive TV exposure

Then there are...

THE BETAS - vying to be Alphas

Top Betas:

4. WEST TIGERS - h & a avg of 18.8k, 4 home stadium of widespread portions of city, big TV exposure - most likely to become an Alpha in next 2-3 years

5. PARRAMATTA EELS - h & a 18.4k, 3rd biggest west sydney team, big away support, big TV exposure - most likely to become an Alpha in next 2-3 years

6. GOLD COAST TITANS - h & a 18.0k, 1 city support, growing away support, big TV exposure - could become an Alpha but may remain static

Lower Betas:

7. SOUTH SYDNEY RABBITOHS - h & a 17.5k, wide city support, large away support, great branding - most likely to become an Alpha in 2-5 years

8. SYDNEY CITY ROOSTERS - h & a 17k, large game support, corporate backing, TV exposure, but fluctuates between Gamma & Beta depending on on-field success

THE GAMMAS - vying to be Betas or regional teams

9. NEWCASTLE KNIGHTS - h & a 14.5k, former Beta, large home support, weaker away support, new stadium, with success could become Beta with large home attendances again

10. MANLY WARRINGAH SEA EAGLES - h & a 14.6k, former beta fluctuating home support, needs new stadium, TV exposure, fluctuates between Beta and Gamma depending on on-field success

11. MELBOURNE STORM - h & a 14.5k, increasing attendances and memberships and new stadium, if successful again will likely become Beta in 2-3 years.

12. NEW ZEALAND WARRIORS - h & a 14.4k, static attendances but booming development, getting some on field consistency, will driving numbers up - likely to become Beta in 2-3 years.

13. NORTH QUEENSLAND COWBOYS - h & a 14.2k, former Beta, attendances dropped this year, peaked around 2005, mismanagement off field affected support, with right management will turn it around - but who knows?

THE DELTAS - former Betas or small regional teams

14. PENRITH PANTHERS - h & a 14.2k, former Beta, struggling to get immigrant locals to change alliegances. On field success this year hasn't turned into crowds yet. Maybe with back to back year it will. Could go back to Gamma next year and Beta year after if it tries.

15. CANBERRA RAIDERS - h & a 13.4k, loyal local fans but low travelling ones, heady days were in early 90's, now competing against Brumbies in small market. Could get 15k again if get some success. Likely to become Gamma in 2 years.

16. CRONULLA SHARKS - h & a 12.1k, loyal local fans but struggling team on field

In Five years we'll likely have

Alphas - Broncos, Dragons, Bulldogs, Tigers, Eels, Rabbitohs
Betas - Titans, Roosters, Knights, Storm, Warriors
Gammas - Sea Eagles, Panthers, Cowboys??, Raiders??
Delta - Sharks??

Franchise Teams would be:

Perth - Gamma
Adelaide - Delta
Central Coast - Gamma (Beta when successful)
Sunshine Coast - Gamma
South West Brisbane - Beta (Alpha when successful)
Central Queensland - Gamma
Port Moresby - Gamma (Delta for the $ components)
Fiji - Delta/Gamma
Wellington - Gamma (Beta when successful)
Christchurch - Gamma (Beta when successful)

Gentlemen, start your bitching ;-)

 

[Desert Qlder]

just sounds like greek to me.

 

[sarahk]

Its quite obvious you've based this on the average crowds but i think when making a list like this you have to take into consideration memberships, tv viewing etc.

I think Parras already an alpha. An article came out recently in the SMH discussing the wealthiest footy clubs.

"In the NRL, television revenue and audience figures are also vital. Of the $169million value applied to Brisbane Broncos, $89.2million can be attributed to television weightings. For the Parramatta Eels, television revenue accounted for $86million of the club's value of $141million.

Interestingly, on a table compiled by brand analysis specialist Repucom International, highlighting the cumulative television audience of all football clubs in Australia across the four codes for 2009 on free-to-air television and Fox Sports, the Broncos are No.1, the Eels are No.2, and Collingwood are No.3."

http://www.smh.com.au/sport/tv-deals...828-13wtr.html

 

[attila_the_gorilla]

So do you propose that something be done with these 4 tiers? Or are you just acknowledging they exist?

 

[TheDalek079]

just sounds like greek to me.

:lol::lol::lol::lol::lol:

 

[krudmonk]

Eels and Roosters the same tier?

 

[Goddo]

I think in terms of Sydney there is definately a "big 5" - Bulldogs, Eels, Dragons, Rabbitohs and Tigers. The Rabbitohs probably weakest of the 5.

The others in Sydney fall into smaller "niche" markets - Sea Eagles and Sharks - or are wealthy and generally don't rely on large public support - Roosters and Panthers.

Of the rest, well they are all key regionals important to the games revenue - Cowboys, Raiders, Storm, Warriors, Broncos, Titans, Knights. Most of these clubs are growing, despite being relatively young. A few have issues that drag them down a tad currently - Knights with their stadium, Titans with CoE bad press and a bit of debt.

We want more top tier clubs when we expand. Best places for this to occur on paper are Ipswich/West Brisbane and Perth. The problem is they need to have a well organised bid first. Thats why it will probably be the Bears and Reds in 2013, where it would be better to go for Perth, Ipswich and Wellington for long term success.

 

[chrisc101]

I think in terms of Sydney there is definately a "big 5" - Bulldogs, Eels, Dragons, Rabbitohs and Tigers. The Rabbitohs probably weakest of the 5.

The others in Sydney fall into smaller "niche" markets - Sea Eagles and Sharks - or are wealthy and generally don't rely on large public support - Roosters and Panthers.

Of the rest, well they are all key regionals important to the games revenue - Cowboys, Raiders, Storm, Warriors, Broncos, Titans, Knights. Most of these clubs are growing, despite being relatively young. A few have issues that drag them down a tad currently - Knights with their stadium, Titans with CoE bad press and a bit of debt.

We want more top tier clubs when we expand. Best places for this to occur on paper are Ipswich/West Brisbane and Perth. The problem is they need to have a well organised bid first. Thats why it will probably be the Bears and Reds in 2013, where it would be better to go for Perth, Ipswich and Wellington for long term success.

Spot on, in Sydney there is a big 5. But Souths isn't the weakest, it is the most untested. They get one finals appearance in the last 20 years and it was at Brookvale! I think across the board the big 5 is very even. Maybe Bulldogs by a nose.

 

[applesauce]

I know people are going to bitch and moan but realistically, to strengthen the game, if the Sea Eagles and Sharks were gone the Sydney competition would benefit immensely.

Sharks we all have ideas as to why, how it should be changed etc. So I wont go there.

But the Sea Eagles are stuck in Brooky with a council unwilling to help the money loss with a redevelopment and the club will lose more $$$/fans as their "niche" market shrinks further when the Bears come in.

I think the Sea Eagles should be looking toward the Sunshine Coast (like they have with their feeder team) and they will become a Beta of Alpha, instead of becoming a stagnant Gamma.

 

[Goddo]

I know people are going to bitch and moan but realistically, to strengthen the game, if the Sea Eagles and Sharks were gone the Sydney competition would benefit immensely.

Sharks we all have ideas as to why, how it should be changed etc. So I wont go there.

But the Sea Eagles are stuck in Brooky with a council unwilling to help the money loss with a redevelopment and the club will lose more $$$/fans as their "niche" market shrinks further when the Bears come in.

I think the Sea Eagles should be looking toward the Sunshine Coast (like they have with their feeder team) and they will become a Beta of Alpha, instead of becoming a stagnant Gamma.

I agree fully.

The Bears bid has huge potential as their fans keep pointing out (1m people, North Sydney CBD, Central Coast juniors, stadium, reconnecting with fans, et cetera). But it will serverely damage the long term outlook for the Sea Eagles, who have problems enough as it is with their ownership structure and stadium. I recon they would willingly move more games to Gosford over time without the Bears bid.

I am against the Bears if better locations can put up a solid bid, but if we do bring back the Bears, something will need to be done about Manly, and a Sunshine Coast/Central Queensland move is probably the best option available.

On Cronulla, their problems are vast, and even if they find a way to struggle on, they will eventually be squeezed from the market, or fold. Might happen in 1 year, maybe 20, but its the most likely outcome.

 

[meltiger]

You only need to look at FNF to see who the big clubs are. C9 don't pick the same teams virtually every week for no reason.


FWIW, I don't actually disagree with the OP bar Parramatta. Agree with Sarah, clearly in the top tier of clubs. & that's taking into account they never win the comp. You watch how big it is when the scums finally salute.

 

[aids]

where we're going we aren't going to need " Tiers".....

 

[Perth Red]

wouldn't really disagree with those placings. Melbourne and Sth's are prob the two clubs with most untapped potential.

Seems like pokie income is going to take a massive hit in the near future if the Indpendent gets his way so that may influence alot about who is and isn;t around and at the top in years to come.

 

[macavity]

You only need to look at FNF to see who the big clubs are. C9 don't pick the same teams virtually every week for no reason.

It is a self fulfilling prophesy

More TV = more sponsorship = better facilities / squad = better performance = more fans = more TV

Lets try 5 years of the Broncos, Dragons, Eels and Bulldogs being on the Graveyard shift on Fox every week, and the Sharks, Raiders, Warriors and Knights getting the friday night live game, and see what the comp looks like then.....

Only when we are in control of our own destiny, and commit to fairly allocating TV exposure, will this comp be anywhere near fair.

Like that will ever happen.

 

[macavity]

Seems like pokie income is going to take a massive hit in the near future if the Indpendent gets his way so that may influence alot about who is and isn;t around and at the top in years to come.

welcome to our world.

only club to get by without a pokie palace or sugar daddy.

 

[Goddo]

wouldn't really disagree with those placings. Melbourne and Sth's are prob the two clubs with most untapped potential.

Seems like pokie income is going to take a massive hit in the near future if the Indpendent gets his way so that may influence alot about who is and isn;t around and at the top in years to come.

I'd expect that money to be channelled back to sporting clubs and sports stadiums/infrastructure.

The government is against "unhealthy" living, so it would be right for the revenue from such activities should be pumped into sport, or sporting organisations would get some sort of waiver, as sport promotes "healthy" living.

EDIT: the problem for us might be that the governments have AFL and soccer as their pet sports. Even Qld is giving AFL a great run.

 

[Perth Red]

but what they are proposing will impact the amount of $'s taken from pokies machines for clubs which will have an effect on how much clubs give to the NRL side of the company. Its not Govt getting more taxes from pokies, it is actually reducing the amount of money that can be put into a pokie machine.

 

[ParraEelsNRL]

It is a self fulfilling prophesy

More TV = more sponsorship = better facilities / squad = better performance = more fans = more TV

Lets try 5 years of the Broncos, Dragons, Eels and Bulldogs being on the Graveyard shift on Fox every week, and the Sharks, Raiders, Warriors and Knights getting the friday night live game, and see what the comp looks like then.....

Only when we are in control of our own destiny, and commit to fairly allocating TV exposure, will this comp be anywhere near fair.

Like that will ever happen.

Eh?

Parramatta had about 3 games on TV from about 1990-1 up to about 1997, it was all the Canberra Raiders.

Didn't hurt Parramatta's support, they were sh*t anyway but once the club started winning, the crowds came back.

 

[BDR]

I think we were in the upper tiers around 2003-6, but we have been woefully managed by one of the most mentally handicapped boards in existence.

Game day used to be a bit of a carnival atmosphere, now it's bland and boring, not to mention the absolute sh*thouse of a team that's been running around out there for the past 3 years

 

[ouwet]

Eh?

Parramatta had about 3 games on TV from about 1990-1 up to about 1997, it was all the Canberra Raiders.

Didn't hurt Parramatta's support, they were sh*t anyway but once the club started winning, the crowds came back.

Every team pretty much goes through it mate... That Newcastle supporter is just bitter! Newcastle from 1997-2004/5 were the NRL & Channel 9 darlings.

Fact is give Cronulla & Penrith EVERY friday night game and it wouldn't do much in lifting there supporter base. Penrith from 2003-2005 got its fair share of games and won a Premiership but it did SFA (As seen by this years averages for a team coming 2nd).