Talking Footy

Swans had done a good job of getting the expats from the AFL states to join at least for a while.However, when it comes to wider support as reflected with TV ratings and we are talking metro only then the Swans aren't even close to any Sydney team even if you compared Swans FTA to a league team on Cable. Richard Colless lamented this a few years ago when he said we have "no latent support" in the community.

Always interesting that AFL crew talk up membership but only their definition so being a member of Leagues club doesn't count (because AFL doesn't have any). A club like the Dragons has something like 100k combined football club and Leagues club members with over 20k in the football club.

Also of interest is that AFL crew seem to ignore the fact that cable TV is much higher in NSW/QLD than AFL states and that is driven by rugby league and shown in the TV ratings. So league fans are happy to pay their $50 a month every month to get their fix of league and have been doing so for years. AFL crew trumpet the GWS when they spend $50 once to be a member.

At some point the AFL crew will recognise that League/NSW/QLD are different

Xman wrote:

You are a complete tool!

The bloods was their nick name. The swans is their mascot.

Just like the Essendon Bombers are also called the Dons.

http://www.sydneyswans.com.au/history/t ... fault.aspx


"The Grand Final of 1945, together with the first Semi-Final in 1970 and Elimination final of 1977 were the only finals the Swans played during their remaining 45 years based at Albert Park – but they failed in all three of these crucial engagements. Of the 12 competing VFL clubs, the Swans finished in 8th place or better on only eight occasions over that 45 year period. These statistics, however, mask the magnificent achievements of the players of that period. The leanest years of the Swans also produced nine Brownlow Medals. The record of 13 medals (by 11 players) is the greatest number achieved by any club in the history of VFL/AFL football."

Is an official AFL site good enough?

what were they called , commonly known as
the swans ... no , they were called the bloods , who cares what their mascot was peanut

case closed

enarelle wrote:

Swans had done a good job of getting the expats from the AFL states to join at least for a while.However, when it comes to wider support as reflected with TV ratings and we are talking metro only then the Swans aren't even close to any Sydney team even if you compared Swans FTA to a league team on Cable. Richard Colless lamented this a few years ago when he said we have "no latent support" in the community.

Always interesting that AFL crew talk up membership but only their definition so being a member of Leagues club doesn't count (because AFL doesn't have any). A club like the Dragons has something like 100k combined football club and Leagues club members with over 20k in the football club.

Also of interest is that AFL crew seem to ignore the fact that cable TV is much higher in NSW/QLD than AFL states and that is driven by rugby league and shown in the TV ratings. So league fans are happy to pay their $50 a month every month to get their fix of league and have been doing so for years. AFL crew trumpet the GWS when they spend $50 once to be a member.

At some point the AFL crew will recognise that League/NSW/QLD are different

well said enarelle
these fumbleball bafoons mistake the swans having a larger average crowd then NRL teams as being indicative of them having superior support
25K at the ground... its a lil thicker on top then NRL teams
go to the next layer ...55K on TV .....
80K people that " follow" the Swans in Sydney.
oh dear ... for the only team in a city of near 5 Million that it & its wombat fans claim is the ... .. most popular in this City ?


Penrith & Cronulla in an NRL match
12K at the ground .. of either club
but a TV audience of 400K ... a third neutral .. a third each of fans for each club
140K fans minimum.... per club
2 that are the least popular... least supported .. smallest in the city , & still way more popular then the Swans.

Swans the most popular team in Sydney
gee
I guess not

enarelle wrote:

Swans had done a good job of getting the expats from the AFL states to join at least for a while.However, when it comes to wider support as reflected with TV ratings and we are talking metro only then the Swans aren't even close to any Sydney team even if you compared Swans FTA to a league team on Cable. Richard Colless lamented this a few years ago when he said we have "no latent support" in the community.

Always interesting that AFL crew talk up membership but only their definition so being a member of Leagues club doesn't count (because AFL doesn't have any). A club like the Dragons has something like 100k combined football club and Leagues club members with over 20k in the football club.

Also of interest is that AFL crew seem to ignore the fact that cable TV is much higher in NSW/QLD than AFL states and that is driven by rugby league and shown in the TV ratings. So league fans are happy to pay their $50 a month every month to get their fix of league and have been doing so for years. AFL crew trumpet the GWS when they spend $50 once to be a member.

At some point the AFL crew will recognise that League/NSW/QLD are different

You had better provide evidence of this because pay TV goes a whole lot wider than just Fox Sports. And besides, when it comes to support for the game you must incorporate the whole picture. Crowd figures, in which the Swans is ahead of every Sydney based NRL club and in fact is ahead of all except maybe the Broncos. The St George Leagues Club may have 100,000 members, but the RL club has none. That 20K you speak of is the club altering the figures again as per the usual habit of NRL clubs with statistics.

Raiderdave wrote:

enarelle wrote:

Swans had done a good job of getting the expats from the AFL states to join at least for a while.However, when it comes to wider support as reflected with TV ratings and we are talking metro only then the Swans aren't even close to any Sydney team even if you compared Swans FTA to a league team on Cable. Richard Colless lamented this a few years ago when he said we have "no latent support" in the community.

Always interesting that AFL crew talk up membership but only their definition so being a member of Leagues club doesn't count (because AFL doesn't have any). A club like the Dragons has something like 100k combined football club and Leagues club members with over 20k in the football club.

Also of interest is that AFL crew seem to ignore the fact that cable TV is much higher in NSW/QLD than AFL states and that is driven by rugby league and shown in the TV ratings. So league fans are happy to pay their $50 a month every month to get their fix of league and have been doing so for years. AFL crew trumpet the GWS when they spend $50 once to be a member.

At some point the AFL crew will recognise that League/NSW/QLD are different

well said enarelle
these fumbleball bafoons mistake the swans having a larger average crowd then NRL teams as being indicative of them having superior support
25K at the ground... its a lil thicker on top then NRL teams
go to the next layer ...55K on TV .....
80K people that " follow" the Swans in Sydney.
oh dear ... for the only team in a city of near 5 Million that it & its wombat fans claim is the ... .. most popular in this City ?


Penrith & Cronulla in an NRL match
12K at the ground .. of either club
but a TV audience of 400K ... a third neutral .. a third each of fans for each club
140K fans minimum.... per club
2 that are the least popular... least supported .. smallest in the city , & still way more popular then the Swans.

Swans the most popular team in Sydney
gee
I guess not

Sure are. Obviously neutral supporters in Syndey watch all RL teams. AFL supporters in Sydney would likely go for the Swans. Therefore TV audiences of 50-100k plus Foxtel audiences are actually decent for a single club with little neutral audience.

So yes, the Swans are the most popular club in Sydney. Their crowds are bigger, they have more memberships, and TV audience acceptable for a single club with little neutral code support.

How you can possibly argue with the fact that the Swans get more fans to games in Sydney, THE RL heartland, is beyond me.

Remember, the Storm get the lowest in Melbourne.

Burying a burp machine is so easy isn't it?

Not arguing the size of the Swans crowds only the relevance of the Swan to the broader community. the Swans are a minor minor player in the Sydney landscape

enarelle wrote:

Not arguing the size of the Swans crowds only the relevance of the Swan to the broader community. the Swans are a minor minor player in the Sydney landscape

and I'm no suggesting AFL is bigger than NRL in Syndey. But on the majority of indicators we have available the Swans are ahead of all other Sydney sporting clubs.

The Swans are a major player whether enarelle likes it or not. A minor player would never be able to draw the crowds the Swans do.

Try and find a pub/club in Sydney where there is a discussion about the Swans even during the season. The Swans have got their expats tightly around them and that is that. When their own CEO/Chairman says they dont have any latent support I dont know what a better indicator is.

enarelle wrote:

Try and find a pub/club in Sydney where there is a discussion about the Swans even during the season. The Swans have got their expats tightly around them and that is that. When their own CEO/Chairman says they dont have any latent support I dont know what a better indicator is.

Well then how do the storm compare?

Yep but then many times the number of expats from AFL states in Sydney versus the reverse. Nature of the economy.

if the AFLs aim was to give the AFL expats a team in Sydney then very successful . If to impact on the locals then hasn't gone anywhere. Don't worry about comparing the SwanS TV ratings to League teams compare them to the AFL teams and you will get an idea that crowds do not translate to a following.

Topper wrote:

The Swans are a major player whether enarelle likes it or not. A minor player would never be able to draw the crowds the Swans do.

25,000 out of 4.75 Million

thats oh .. so .. minor

Bahahahaha, the swans would be behind every NRL club in Sydney, heck even the sharkies and panthers would piss on them from a great height.

Raiderdave wrote:

Topper wrote:

The Swans are a major player whether enarelle likes it or not. A minor player would never be able to draw the crowds the Swans do.

25,000 out of 4.75 Million

For the nrl

Raiderdave wrote:

thats oh .. so .. minor