North Melbourne, St Kilda, Western Bulldogs, Melbourne - Which club is smallest?

[Dirty Bird]

I was just curious about what crowds non-Victorian teams pulled in Victoria compared with each other, but as I was at it I thought I'd go through every team.

What do people on BigFooty think. Which of those 4 are the smallest?

We all hear the trolls about North Melbourne.
But they're actually 10% larger than the Bulldogs when it comes to the crowd average of their last home games vs each team.

St Kilda is down sub 30k averages as well with these 2 as well as the QLD and NSW teams.

Melbourne is above 30k so one could argue they don't belong in this poll, but take out their outlier of Queens Birthday, they lose 10% and drop below St Kilda.

 

[dinger]

If you're talking about crowds pulled I'd probs pull up some statistics from the last 1-10 years, average them and then rank them highest to lowest.
But I'm too lazy so just imagine my answer is ^ that and we'll call it a day.

 

[LicoriceAllsorts]

Melbourne... Really?

 

[Dirty Bird]

Melbourne... Really?

Melbourne is above 30k so one could argue they don't belong in this poll, but take out their outlier of Queens Birthday, they lose 10% and drop below St Kilda.

 

[JeffDunne]

I don't under the question.

 

[Dirty Bird]

Interesting, if todays crowd is only 30,000. St Kilda will drop that much, rather than being clear of North and the Bulldogs, to being right in there fighting.

Will leave Melbourne as an outlier though.

If I rated all Victorian clubs in terms of support, it'd go

1 - Collingwood
2/3 - Essendon/Richmond
4/5 - Carlton/Hawthorn
6 - Geelong
7 - Melbourne
8/9 - North Melbourne/St Kilda
10 - Western Bulldogs

 

[Rainfall]

Relocate WBD to NT as they have a huge fanbase up there

 

[Dazb86]

Probably us overall.

Can change with form between us and North.

Saints shouldn't even be in the equation. Have a massive supporter base in the sth east.

 

[Trav 20]

We've had one of the worst 7 year periods in VFL/AFL history.

Given even a reasonable run at form and ladder position we pull more than those mentioned in the poll.

 

[The Blue Baggers]

Interesting, if todays crowd is only 30,000. St Kilda will drop that much, rather than being clear of North and the Bulldogs, to being right in there fighting.

Will leave Melbourne as an outlier though.

If I rated all Victorian clubs in terms of support, it'd go

1 - Collingwood
2/3 - Essendon/Richmond
4/5 - Carlton/Hawthorn
6 - Geelong
7 - Melbourne
8/9 - North Melbourne/St Kilda
10 - Western Bulldogs

you have absolutely no idea !!

 

[Nallad]

North easily. Probably won't exist in a few years.

 

[juss]

Melbourne are the games oldest club aren't they?
I reckon they have a lot of supporters that don't attend/buy memberships due to their horror last 5-10 years.

The Doggies or North would have the smallest fan base of those listed I reckon. North have been a decent side, few finals appearances and will make it again this year, and yet their numbers still aren't that good. At least the other clubs can blame it on being poor on field at the moment.

That being said, I don't think North nor the Bulldogs will fold/relocate in the next decade.

 

[Engimal]

North easily. Probably won't exist in a few years.

Really? North have 8,000 more members than St Kilda and the Bulldogs and 3,000 more members than Melbourne.

 

[TheHoneyBadger]

you have absolutely no idea !!

I'd suggest he's pretty close, to be honest. Put Melbourne ahead of Geelong and North Melbourne on par with the Bulldogs (take away the Tassie members and acknowledge they're in the 8 and constantly on the cusp, and the Dogs haven't been for 3 years, and the difference is hardly noticeable - just interchangeable with form), and I reckon it's bang on.

 

[The Blue Baggers]

I'd suggest he's pretty close, to be honest. Put Melbourne ahead of Geelong and North Melbourne on par with the Bulldogs (take away the Tassie members and acknowledge they're in the 8 and constantly on the cusp, and the Dogs haven't been for 3 years, and the difference is hardly noticeable - just interchangeable with form), and I reckon it's bang on.

Seriously Richmond are not even close to Carlton in crowds, social media nos, membership revenue, afl members ... In fact anything other than self proclaimed members, even then the blues were ahead until 2 years ago until non access members were counted !!!

 

[TheHoneyBadger]

Seriously Richmond are not even close to Carlton in crowds, social media nos, membership revenue, afl members ... In fact anything other than self proclaimed members, even then the blues were ahead until 2 years ago until non access members were counted !!!

They're much closer than you think. Richmond's pull is enormous despite decades of failure. Carlton has fallen by the wayside, to a degree. You could put it down to supporters who will only show up for the success, supporters who jumped off after the salary cap issues, the obvious recent drop-off in AFL attendances generally, perhaps even the fact they play at Etihad Stadium is having an effect.

But for me, there's no doubt Richmond have a greater supporter base to draw on than Carlton regardless.

 

[The Blue Baggers]

They're much closer than you think. Richmond's pull is enormous despite decades of failure. Carlton has fallen by the wayside, to a degree. You could put it down to supporters who will only show up for the success, supporters who jumped off after the salary cap issues, the obvious recent drop-off in AFL attendances generally, perhaps even the fact they play at Etihad Stadium is having an effect.

But for me, there's no doubt Richmond have a greater supporter base to draw on than Carlton regardless.

you can have opinion ... just in this case it's soooo wrong on NUMBERS

 

[MaddAdam]

North easily. Probably won't exist in a few years.

Yep, right.

 

[Engimal]

Yep, right.

Isn't that what they were saying a couple of years ago?

 

[franjon]

Isn't that what they were saying a couple of years ago?

Actually it's what has been getting said for about 30 years. But I understand why that poster would want that, it would mean one less regulation loss to Richmond.

 

[Elroo]

Whats the current memberships numbers?

North: 39,095
Saints: 30,045
WB: 30,400

 

[TheHoneyBadger]

Whats the current memberships numbers?

North: 39,095
Saints: 30,045
WB: 30,400

Membership numbers fluctuate with form and different clubs count different things.

Worth noting North have a presence in Tasmania too.

 

[Elroo]

Membership numbers fluctuate with form and different clubs count different things.

Worth noting North have a presence in Tasmania too.

North membership has been higher than the Bulldogs on average since the inception of the AFL.

And the bulldogs have a presence in Cairns, your point being?

I won't even go into the relative financial positions of each club as thats another one the Bulldogs would lose.

 

[TheHoneyBadger]

North membership has been higher than the Bulldogs on average since the inception of the AFL.

And the bulldogs have a presence in Cairns, your point being?

I won't even go into the relative financial positions of each club as thats another one the Bulldogs would lose.

The Bulldogs haven't even played their first fixture in Cairns yet and have sold it entirely for the money, there's no investment in the area as North have with Tassie.

I'm not having a go at North, I'm mentioning that it's pointless to look at current membership numbers as an indicator of which club is bigger, as they indeed fluctuate with form and circumstances. Essendon are a bigger club than Hawthorn but the membership numbers don't reflect that at the moment.

But go ahead and play the man, not the ball.

 

[Elroo]

The Bulldogs haven't even played their first fixture in Cairns yet and have sold it entirely for the money, there's no investment in the area as North have with Tassie.

I'm not having a go at North, I'm mentioning that it's pointless to look at current membership numbers as an indicator of which club is bigger, as they indeed fluctuate with form and circumstances. Essendon are a bigger club than Hawthorn but the membership numbers don't reflect that at the moment.

But go ahead and play the man, not the ball.

Oh I see you have dropped Darwin like hot potato's and now it's Cairns; didn't the WB pick up any supporters in Darwin?

So the WB aren't investing in Cairns like North is in Tassie and your club wonders why it is struggling financially and with membership numbers?

I wasn't looking at current membership numbers, I was looking at the historical average since the AFL's inception, mentioned in my previous post.

When have a I played the man or is the a deflection?