TV Deal Announced

[Perth Red]

We don't need RU restricting the growth of the game, we are doing a fine job on our own!

 

[Goddo]

think they should seriously look to add 2 teams now from 2018

do all yoru research, develop the possible markets,

put lots of cash in all junior development, including in those possible markets

add two teams for 2018

if nine dont want to televise the extra game - give 7 or 10, one game a week

eg if ten is already televising the game plan, im sure theyd throw some money at 1 game a week

This is what I'd like to see. Use the current deal to strengthen the game as is, then expand at the next deal.

Also, reduce the number of home games for each club to 11 when we expand, and have a few more split rounds around origin time. Season is a bit long, but any loss of matches is covered by new teams in new/undervalued markets.

 

[newman]

Just one amongst many. Watching the penrith game at he moment and shaking my head that Perth can't have a team yet the Arlc is happy to throw money at clubs that are drawing 7k fans to keep them afloat.

Would the Pirates get a better crowd in round 25 on the back of a third diabolical season, ravaged by injury and at the foot of the ladder, that is if they were in the same position as the Panthers? I doubt it.

You are grasping at straws now.

 

[Lockyer4President!]

Would the Pirates get a better crowd in round 25 on the back of a third diabolical season, ravaged by injury and at the foot of the ladder, that is if they were in the same position as the Panthers? I doubt it.

You are grasping at straws now.

When there are 12 games a year in the entire state you'll find that the fans are not so picky as Sydneysiders...

 

[newman]

When there are 12 games a year in the entire state you'll find that the fans are not so picky as Sydneysiders...

You dont know that. What were the Reds crowd averages, and the worst crowds they attracted?

 

[newman]

Ok so I did a bit of research.
Apart from some 20k plus crowds in the early days of the Reds, crowds for Perth quickly slumped to an average of 8 thousand per year. In 97 there was even a crowd of 5083 v Hunter Mariners.

1995- 8102
1996- 8262
1997- 8931

Now I can imagine that 15 years on those averages would go up to around 11k-12k but there is no way that a new Perth Franchise would be immune from a 'Penrith like' crowd of 7k were it in the end of the season and they were tracking poorly.

Lucky crowds are not the determining factor.

 

[Lockyer4President!]

Ok so I did a bit of research.
Apart from some 20k plus crowds in the early days of the Reds, crowds for Perth quickly slumped to an average of 8 thousand per year. In 97 there was even a crowd of 5083 v Hunter Mariners.

1995- 8102
1996- 8262
1997- 8931

Now I can imagine that 15 years on those averages would go up to around 11k-12k but there is no way that a new Perth Franchise would be immune from a 'Penrith like' crowd of 7k were it in the end of the season and they were tracking poorly.

Lucky crowds are not the determining factor.

Instead of using figures from almost two decades ago and during the most tumultuous time in the games history why not use current figures? Like the 20K+ and 15K+ that paid for tickets to games this year?

Perth hasn't had an NRL game under 13K since 2005. For a city which has largely been ignored by the NRL and only has a team in a Sydney juniors comp to represent them I think they're doing alright...

 

[newman]

Instead of using figures from almost two decades ago and during the most tumultuous time in the games history why not use current figures? Like the 20K+ and 15K+ that paid for tickets to games this year?

Perth hasn't had an NRL game under 13K since 2005. For a city which has largely been ignored by the NRL and only has a team in a Sydney juniors comp to represent them I think they're doing alright...

You cant use current figures because they are not relevant.

Look at the figures for the Reds, and its the same story with the Titans. Early on, there is excitement and justifiable big crowds. Then crowds ease well back, in fact the average is less than half of those early games. One off games involving non local clubs give little indication to what crowds will be like week in week out. Years later, the averages stay the same but you get less of those watershed big crowd games.

 

[Quidgybo]

Ok so I did a bit of research.

Yawn. Even teams who had 50 to 90 years to establish a rusted on fanbase struggled to draw crowds in those years (the entire ARL comp averaged under 10k in 1997), let alone a frontier team that had all of four matches to establish themselves before the game exploded in war. Come back to us when you have some research without a giant asterisk hanging over it.

Leigh.

 

[newman]

Look at the Titans Skilled Stadium years. Their first match in 2008 has 26k and the average for the year is 21k.

Then the gradual decline starts.

Fast Forward to 2012 and their biggest crowd is 21k and they are averaging 14k with plenty of matches in the low 11's. A couple of years like Penrith and I guarantee they would hit 7 or 8k for a late season match in junk weather

 

[newman]

Yawn. Even teams who had 50 to 90 years to establish a rusted on fanbase struggled to draw crowds in those years (the entire ARL comp averaged under 10k in 1997), let alone a frontier team that had all of four matches to establish themselves before the game exploded in war. Come back to us when you have some research without a giant asterisk hanging over it.

Leigh.

I'm not so concerned with the late 90s figures but the assertion that the crowds at these one off games will directly correate to Perth having great crowds week in week out. It simply doesnt work like that (It also irks me that bid supporters say shit like "Oh Penrith only got 7k and we got 15k to the Manly game, we should be in, not them"). What the Reds first incarnation (info from 90s much more relevant) and the Titans have shown us that that when the early excitement dies off, the average crowds are closer to half that of those early landmark matches.

Its lucky that crowds are not the determining factor in this expansion anyway. Perth crowds, even at around 13-18k week to week is totally fine for the purposes of expansion. Crowds are the last thing the Pirates bid has to worry about.

 

[Perth Red]

We'll avg 16K+ imo. I am basing this on the starving RL fans in Perth that are desperate to follow the game again live. lol at using figures from 96&97. Perth is a different city and the game is in a very different place from that era, as said EVERY teams crowds dropped dramatically and the Reds crowds were not the worse in the league back then anyway.

I would imagine the cr4ppy teams we play will draw around 14k and the top drawing teams will sell out (Sth's, Broncos, Warriors, St's based on the fanbases here of those teams)

Force have managed to retain a 14K+ avg despite being poor every year since they started, I can't see why we would not do the same as a min.

Whilst you are right Newman that one off crowds (though we have had 3 games here this year and 2 previous) aren't 100% proof they are an indication of the fanbase for the game here and with our own team to support we will attract the RL fans that now live in perth alongside building up a new generation of RL fan. If you want to watch live NRL and live in perth you will have one option, that is the difference.

 

[CowboyFuriousFury]

newman

According to rl stats in 96/97 the Western Reds outdrew the following Sydney teams they are still in competition today and not merged.

96: Canterbury, Penrith & Souths.
97: Penrith & Souths.

Yet the Western Reds got the boot & the Sydney teams stayed no surprise really but when you consider the crowds in the late 90's were dreadful overall in particular Sydney teams that had decades to garner support to draw single digit crowds is embarrassing.

http://stats.rleague.com/rl/crowds/1996.html
http://stats.rleague.com/rl/crowds/1997SL.html
http://stats.rleague.com/rl/crowds/1997.html

 

[flippikat]

Force have managed to retain a 14K+ avg despite being poor every year since they started, I can't see why we would not do the same as a min.

Considering that Rugby League has far more of the 'razzle dazzle' than union, features arguably the better athletes, and is far easier for the AFL-inclined to pick-up the rules (no "tackled ball" murk) - that's not a bad assumption.

 

[LJC]

Stop trying to eat our clubs from within!
Additional clubs are the answer not canibalism of existing clubs.
Growth by more teams is the only way to go!
Otherwise you are asking for much heartache and erosion of the heart of our game!Superleague all over again my fellow "RL" supporters!