Official List of Excuses for Low RL Crowds

Topper · Post by **Topper** » Thu Jan 05, 2012 8:36 am

The burp machine is burping away about a single situation that means nothing in the big picture.

Post by **Beaussie** » Thu Jan 05, 2012 9:12 am

Xman wrote:
Raiderdave wrote:
Xman wrote:
The swans have made the finals in 11 of the past 20 seasons, made 3 grand finals and won a single premiership. In that time their home crowds have gone from 9000 to 27000.

The storm have Made the finals in 11 of their 14 years, made 5 grand finals and won 3 premierships (stripped of 2 for cheating). In that time their home crowds have gone from 12700 to 14200.

Owned!
9 times in the past 14 ... I did say 1997 knucklehead
& their crowds have dropped by 33%

Storms have risen by 20%

case closed
The storm have gone up 12% maths genius. That's after 5 GF appearances and 11 finals appearances in 14 years! Massive

The Storm are a massive failure in sports mad Melbourne. Did you know they suck over $11 million annually out of the NRL/News Ltd and the other clubs? Over $11 million annually

Xman · Post by **Xman** » Thu Jan 05, 2012 9:18 am

Beaussie wrote:
Xman wrote:
Raiderdave wrote:
9 times in the past 14 ... I did say 1997 knucklehead
& their crowds have dropped by 33%

Storms have risen by 20%

case closed
The storm have gone up 12% maths genius. That's after 5 GF appearances and 11 finals appearances in 14 years! Massive
The Storm are a massive failure in sports mad Melbourne. Did you know they suck over $11 million annually out of the NRL/News Ltd and the other clubs? Over $11 million annually

and these RL fools crap on about the AFL's expensive expansion teams in the Suns and Giants.

11Mil annually is a disgrace. The storms failure to grow during this goldern era is glaring. They may not even exist when they become also rans.

Post by **Beaussie** » Thu Jan 05, 2012 9:22 am

Imagine a few lean years for the Storm and what that would mean for the NRL. Imagine the bailout required then. Even scarier, imagine the crowds. Attendance numbers and memberships are already pitiful for such a successful team on the field. Victorians just will not embrace the inferior RL product.

Xman · Post by **Xman** » Thu Jan 05, 2012 9:42 am

Beaussie wrote:
Imagine a few lean years for the Storm and what that would mean for the NRL. Imagine the bailout required then. Even scarier, imagine the crowds. Attendance numbers and memberships are already pitiful for such a successful team on the field. Victorians just will not embrace the inferior RL product.

Yes Melbourne love all sports and attend almost everything in massive numbers. However RL is on the very bottom end of what is considered a decent spectator sport. Unfortunately for them Melbourne already well and truly love AFL and in comparison RL is definately the much uglier sister.

Raiderdave · Post by **Raiderdave** » Thu Jan 05, 2012 12:17 pm

Beaussie wrote:
Xman wrote:
Raiderdave wrote:
9 times in the past 14 ... I did say 1997 knucklehead
& their crowds have dropped by 33%

Storms have risen by 20%

case closed
The storm have gone up 12% maths genius. That's after 5 GF appearances and 11 finals appearances in 14 years! Massive
The Storm are a massive failure in sports mad Melbourne. Did you know they suck over $11 million annually out of the NRL/News Ltd and the other clubs? Over $11 million annually

gee
wouldn't the AFL love to ...only .. have to pay 11million a year for GWS or the Thuns

cos789 · Post by **cos789** » Thu Jan 05, 2012 1:00 pm

Xman wrote:
Beaussie wrote:
Imagine a few lean years for the Storm and what that would mean for the NRL. Imagine the bailout required then. Even scarier, imagine the crowds. Attendance numbers and memberships are already pitiful for such a successful team on the field. Victorians just will not embrace the inferior RL product.
Yes Melbourne love all sports and attend almost everything in massive numbers. However RL is on the very bottom end of what is considered a decent spectator sport. Unfortunately for them Melbourne already well and truly love AFL and in comparison RL is definately the much uglier sister.

Well the new RU team is doing better than the established rl team.
Well the new soccer team is doing better than the established rl team.
Well the new netball team is doing better than the established rl team.
Well the new darts team is doing better than the established rl team.
Well the old farts team is doing better than the established rl team.

enarelle · Post by **enarelle** » Thu Jan 05, 2012 1:06 pm

how do all those other sports rate on TV compared to rugby league/storm? Imagine if more games were shown live?

Xman · Post by **Xman** » Thu Jan 05, 2012 1:40 pm

enarelle wrote:
how do all those other sports rate on TV compared to rugby league/storm? Imagine if more games were shown live?

Not sure thats got anything to do with the popularity of RL in Melbourne. Cos was confirming the fact that Melbourne love all sports, but RL the least.

enarelle · Post by **enarelle** » Thu Jan 05, 2012 1:53 pm

I would have thought that TV as the medium that gives the greatest exposure and coverage would be kind of important. Doesnt it give the AFL the lions share of its dollars?

cos789 · Post by **cos789** » Thu Jan 05, 2012 1:57 pm

Xman wrote:
enarelle wrote:
how do all those other sports rate on TV compared to rugby league/storm? Imagine if more games were shown live?
Not sure thats got anything to do with the popularity of RL in Melbourne. Cos was confirming the fact that Melbourne love all sports, but RL the least.

When you consider that RU is not on FTA, that's an even greater loss for rl to it's bitter rival RU.

Raiderdave · Post by **Raiderdave** » Thu Jan 05, 2012 1:59 pm

Xman wrote:
enarelle wrote:
how do all those other sports rate on TV compared to rugby league/storm? Imagine if more games were shown live?
Not sure thats got anything to do with the popularity of RL in Melbourne. Cos was confirming the fact that Melbourne love all sports, but RL the least.

Like NSWshmen & Qlders love all sports .. but AFL the least

Raiderdave · Post by **Raiderdave** » Thu Jan 05, 2012 2:00 pm

cos789 wrote:
Xman wrote:
enarelle wrote:
how do all those other sports rate on TV compared to rugby league/storm? Imagine if more games were shown live?
Not sure thats got anything to do with the popularity of RL in Melbourne. Cos was confirming the fact that Melbourne love all sports, but RL the least.
When you consider that RU is not on FTA, that's an even greater loss for rl to it's bitter rival RU.

RU not on FTA ?

funny
I coulda sworn I saw all their tests on this year on FTA

Xman · Post by **Xman** » Thu Jan 05, 2012 2:08 pm

Raiderdave wrote:
Xman wrote:
enarelle wrote:
how do all those other sports rate on TV compared to rugby league/storm? Imagine if more games were shown live?
Not sure thats got anything to do with the popularity of RL in Melbourne. Cos was confirming the fact that Melbourne love all sports, but RL the least.
Like NSWshmen & Qlders love all sports .. but AFL the least

Really? Interesting the Swans average crowds higher than any other sporting club in Sydney, including RL

Meanwhile the storm are on the other end of the spectrum in Melbourne!

Topper · Post by **Topper** » Thu Jan 05, 2012 2:25 pm

And that's the key statistic of the lot, Xman.

Talking Footy

Talking Footy

Official List of Excuses for Low RL Crowds

Re: Official List of Excuses for Low RL Crowds

Re: Official List of Excuses for Low RL Crowds

Re: Official List of Excuses for Low RL Crowds

Re: Official List of Excuses for Low RL Crowds

Re: Official List of Excuses for Low RL Crowds

Re: Official List of Excuses for Low RL Crowds

Re: Official List of Excuses for Low RL Crowds

Re: Official List of Excuses for Low RL Crowds

Re: Official List of Excuses for Low RL Crowds

Re: Official List of Excuses for Low RL Crowds

Re: Official List of Excuses for Low RL Crowds

Re: Official List of Excuses for Low RL Crowds

Re: Official List of Excuses for Low RL Crowds

Re: Official List of Excuses for Low RL Crowds

Re: Official List of Excuses for Low RL Crowds