Crowd Watch 2011 Mk II

[MsStorm]

excellent crowd, but they were a bit quiet it seemed to me.

 

[ozjet1]

So am i getting this right. You would rather be almost alone on the hill in a stale atmosphere than on a packed hill with a cracking atmosphere?

If i read that right you are either pissed or off your rocker:crazy:

i dont always need the hype of people or 'crowds' to enjoy myself at an event. In this case, it's the football that I was going to see, not to admire the crowd.

It was a Monday night and at Leichhardt. Having to deal with 18k at a venue with shit facilities wasnt what I wouldve hoped to deal with last night, particularly as I wouldve just walked up on my own. Just a decent game of footy. That's all I was saying.

I commended the size of the crowd.

 

[bobmar28]

Then keep wasting your breath because those 9 Sydney teams are here for stay for a while yet.

What about those empty steats in Melbourne, Canberra, Gold Coast, Auckland? You seem to have selected eyesight and magically can't see those empty seats? Your problem is your selective biased criticism to suit your agenda. That's why most people don't rate your opinion on these forums.

Melbourne, Canberra, Gold Coast and Auckland are one team towns. Should we abandon them and leave those areas to AFL?

Sydney on the other hand has a rediculous 9 teams for one city. With many of those teams playing to near empty stadiums they are presenting a negative image of the game.

You don't rate my opinion? I don't give a shit.

 

[adamkungl]

Please explain again to the uneducated plebs who don't rate your opinion, ie. everyone, how removing teams adds more fans?

 

[DC_fan]

After R.13

2011 16,534 (average crowd)
2010 16,604
2009 16,455
2008 16,409
2007 16,136

Crowds this season are down by .4 percent on last year at the same stage of the season.

For the other three seasons this years average is up by .5 percent on 2009, up .8 percent on 2008 and up 2.5 on 2007.

 

[Bluebags1908]

Melbourne, Canberra, Gold Coast and Auckland are one team towns. Should we abandon them and leave those areas to AFL?

Sydney on the other hand has a rediculous 9 teams for one city. With many of those teams playing to near empty stadiums they are presenting a negative image of the game.

You don't rate my opinion? I don't give a shit.

At no stage did I say to get rid of one town teams - stop putting words in my mouth. Canberra, Gold Coast, Warriors, etc are a must for the competition.

But so are the Sydney teams. I also think 9 Sydney teams is about right (OK maybe Cronnulla is expendable). We've tried your competition model before - it was called Super League and it didn't work.

Cutting Sydney teams does not equal more fans going to games for the teams that are left - a case in point, have Manly's crowds at Brookvale increased beause the Bears were cut? NO. This would be repeated all over Sydney under your model.

Your problem is that you have selective criticism and only want to have a vendetta against Sydney teams simply because of geography. If your praise or criticisms were fair to all teams in teh NRL regardless of geography then maybe more people would listen to you.

An empty seat in Canberra or Gold Coast is the same as an empty seat in Parramatta or SFS. If Canberra were axed then a lost Raiders fan to the game is the same as a lost fan from a Sydney team that were cut - they are not going to go and follow another team. Just ask a Bears fan.

As for your opinion, you come on here basically every day saying "cut Sydney teams". OK fair enough say it one or twice, but everyone on this forum is tired of your agenda-driven rants, and most disagree with you.

Keep wasting your breath and your life on these forums. No-one can predict distant the future, but Sydney teams aren't going anywhere anytime soon. Either enjoy and follow the NRL as it is or keep whining.

 

[Bluebags1908]

Please explain again to the uneducated plebs who don't rate your opinion, ie. everyone, how removing teams adds more fans?

Exactly

 

[Raiders_Premiers]

How is 9 Sydney teams about right?

let's look at this down the pipeline, say 30-40 years from now

what other clubs do we want, if we want the game to be truly national (+ NZ & PNG)

WA
Central Coast
Adelaide
South Queensland
Wellington
PNG
Possible Central Queensland Team
2nd Melbourne Team

Do you truly think having a 24 team competition is viable?

 

[Timmah]

Natural attrition will kill of Sydney club/s with little to no future.

I can't imagine anyone thinks Cronulla is strong enough to still be kicking around in 2020 and beyond unless they are propped up by the governing body, particularly when the game is hoping to expand.

 

[adamkungl]

Cronulla will still be here in 2020.
24 teams is viable if we expand at grassroots as well as the top.

 

[Billythekid]

How is 9 Sydney teams about right?

let's look at this down the pipeline, say 30-40 years from now

what other clubs do we want, if we want the game to be truly national (+ NZ & PNG)

WA
Central Coast
Adelaide
South Queensland
Wellington
PNG
Possible Central Queensland Team
2nd Melbourne Team

Do you truly think having a 24 team competition is viable?

Yes. Have a look at the teams you listed. How many of these areas are going to open up all new avenues for juniors.

If we ever reach a point where a team in all those areas are viable then i think the NRL will be overflowing with potential talent.

Even if 9 teams isn't optimal no one should be kicked out. If a team is left behind whilst the NRL expands thats one thing. However kicking them out is a terrible option.

 

[Bluebags1908]

How is 9 Sydney teams about right?

let's look at this down the pipeline, say 30-40 years from now

what other clubs do we want, if we want the game to be truly national (+ NZ & PNG)

WA
Central Coast
Adelaide
South Queensland
Wellington
PNG
Possible Central Queensland Team
2nd Melbourne Team

Do you truly think having a 24 team competition is viable?

At the moment and in the forseeable future, no 24 teams is not viable. But in 30 or 40 years with the talent pool increased who knows? We had 22 teams in 1997 (which admittedly wasn't good at that time with the talent spread too thin).

The biggest problem with 24 teams is the player pool. But the good news is that adding a team from PNG (2 million players) and a 2nd New Zealand team will dramatically increase the player pool for all teams. Those 2 teams will be self-sufficient player-wise and there will be surplus players so you can almost not count those 2 teams as part of your 24, player-wise.

We may well end up having a couple of less Sydney teams eventually, (i.e. Cronulla) but it must be through natural process. Forcing teams out or death-riding them by jumping on this forum every day of your life to axe teams now or in the next 2 , 3, or 5 years or so is not the answer. For the moment all the teams we've got must be supported and assisted to be as strong as possible - regardless of geography.

I agree it's a tricky process but all those bids you mention will not come in at the same time. Let's just concentrate on 18 teams and then 20 teams. What happens after that is in the lap of the Gods. One step at a time.

Like I said, 9 Sydney teams will be here for some time to come.

 

[cleary89]

How is 9 Sydney teams about right?

let's look at this down the pipeline, say 30-40 years from now

what other clubs do we want, if we want the game to be truly national (+ NZ & PNG)

WA
Central Coast
Adelaide
South Queensland
Wellington
PNG
Possible Central Queensland Team
2nd Melbourne Team

Do you truly think having a 24 team competition is viable?

No need for 2nd melb or CQLD.

CC can only happen if sharks/manly or any other Sydney team want to relocate.

Adelaide wont be on the cards for a long time.

20 team comp, would be nice.

 

[Raiders_Premiers]

At the moment and in the forseeable future, no 24 teams is not viable. But in 30 or 40 years with the talent pool increased who knows? We had 22 teams in 1997 (which admittedly wasn't good at that time with the talent spread too thin).

The biggest problem with 24 teams is the player pool. But the good news is that adding a team from PNG (2 million players) and a 2nd New Zealand team will dramatically increase the player pool for all teams. Those 2 teams will be self-sufficient player-wise and there will be surplus players so you can almost not count those 2 teams as part of your 24, player-wise.

We may well end up having a couple of less Sydney teams eventually, (i.e. Cronulla) but it must be through natural process. Forcing teams out or death-riding them by jumping on this forum every day of your life to axe teams now or in the next 2 , 3, or 5 years or so is not the answer. For the moment all the teams we've got must be supported and assisted to be as strong as possible - regardless of geography.

I agree it's a tricky process but all those bids you mention will not come in at the same time. Let's just concentrate on 18 teams and then 20 teams. What happens after that is in the lap of the Gods. One step at a time.

Like I said, 9 Sydney teams will be here for some time to come.

Which is why I wouldn't want teams like Cronulla to simply just die off. Relocation would be a far, far better option than them not existing at all

 

[MightySharks]

Some in here a going to be upset when the soil gets tuned down at Cronulla next year.

As I said earlier some fans should look at their own clubs before they point the finger at Cronulla.

 

[docbrown]

Fantastic crowd and looks great on TV too.

So far the origin affected rounds, 11-13 have got 279,210 compared to the same rounds last year which got 226,116 through the gates. That is a big increase and sets us back on track for a good year crowd wise.

My conservative predictions for the rest of the origin period have us thrashing 2010's total by 50k+ assuming no washout weekends.

This was what I was getting at.

If we can increase on our average during the origin period, then there are enough big games still left after in to ensure an overall increase.

 

[taipan]

Some in here a going to be upset when the soil gets tuned down at Cronulla next year.

As I said earlier some fans should look at their own clubs before they point the finger at Cronulla.

Exactly.Some like pointing the finger at the Sharks, but should their own club have financial problems,they should be saved at all costs.
None of us have any idea what this minority govt,under the control of looney independents will do with poker machine restrictions.

If the dozers start gouging in the future ,they are going to try another avenue.

 

[BDGS]

After R.13

2011 16,534 (average crowd)
2010 16,604
2009 16,455
2008 16,409
2007 16,136

Crowds this season are down by .4 percent on last year at the same stage of the season.

For the other three seasons this years average is up by .5 percent on 2009, up .8 percent on 2008 and up 2.5 on 2007.

Thanks for that.

 

[bobmar28]

Please explain again to the uneducated plebs who don't rate your opinion, ie. everyone, how removing teams adds more fans?

Don't pretend you speak for everyone on this forum you douche.

 

[1 Eyed TEZZA]

Don't pretend you speak for everyone on this forum you douche.

Way to avoid the question, douche.