Talking Footy

pussycat wrote:

Just because your mob don't have representative matches (real not pretend) doesn't mean we don't!

NRL - 1,2 and 3

We don't because we don't need them to be successful! You have to have them because without them your precious game is only a poor TV deal away from oblivion!

adamj1300 wrote:

pussycat wrote:

Just because your mob don't have representative matches (real not pretend) doesn't mean we don't!

NRL - 1,2 and 3

state vs state gimmick,
take that off the overall ratings & the NRL ratings look even worse

they're not even part of this table cockhead :_<> :_<> :_<>

another 12 Million for Origin
1.2 Million for the ANZAC test
1.2 Million for the All stars
800K for the city country

& what ever the 4 nations or world cup add on at the end of each year

the VFL is left for dead when all this is taken into consideration eh piss flap ?

Raiderdave wrote:

adamj1300 wrote:

pussycat wrote:

Just because your mob don't have representative matches (real not pretend) doesn't mean we don't!

NRL - 1,2 and 3

state vs state gimmick,
take that off the overall ratings & the NRL ratings look even worse

they're not even part of this table cockhead :_<> :_<> :_<>

another 12 Million for Origin
1.2 Million for the ANZAC test
1.2 Million for the All stars
800K for the city country

& what ever the 4 nations or world cup add on at the end of each year

the VFL is left for dead when all this is taken into consideration eh piss flap ?

so basically failuerdave, is if you take off the 12 million bandwagon fans of state of origin, the other viewers that watch the other rep games, the whole overall NRL viewers are even less?

now who is leaving who for dead :>::
more evidence AFL wins hands down in the ratings as well

To clarify, Dave, the ratings linked above INCLUDE those rep games (even though they shouldn't!)!

NRLCrap1 wrote:

To clarify, Dave, the ratings linked above INCLUDE those rep games (even though they shouldn't!)!

Even if they do include rep games , and I doubt that they do (perhaps you could provide a link to the site) in previous years they have been treated seperately. But, even so, AFL have achieve these results by having 3.5 live matches per week to the NRL's 1.

NRLCrap1 wrote:

To clarify, Dave, the ratings linked above INCLUDE those rep games (even though they shouldn't!)!

separate cockhead

separate

The_Wookie wrote:

Raiderdave wrote:

NRLCrap1 wrote:

To clarify, Dave, the ratings linked above INCLUDE those rep games (even though they shouldn't!)!

separate cockhead

separate

Actually they are inclusive. Just like the rights for origin are included in the NRLs tv rights.

i wish i had kept the link for the article, as i cannot find it any more.
but those ratings are all up of the NRL and AFL, with you add the reports the AFL ratings went up and NRL's ratings declined

The_Wookie wrote:

pussycat wrote:

It was'nt our best season - Ratings wise. But even with the poor scheduling, we still managed 4 of the top 5 highest rating matches. The $50m profit was just icing on the cake

Anyone can save $50 million if you dont spend it on anything.

NRL clubs got 120 million in 2013, AFL clubs got $200 million (in 2012)
NRL state comps got 22 million in 2013, AFL state comps got $36 million (in 2012)
NRL grassroots and development got 17 million in 2013, AFL development got 21 million. (in 2012)

Doesn't that figure include handouts to keep struggling clubs afloat?


'Any fool can spend money , It takes a wise man to make money'' !