Where's the AFL show for fans with an IQ above 80?

[GordonStrangler]

There is a GIGANTIC gap that is wide open for Foxtel or the networks to fill. Footy media is 10 years behind the coaches and strategies.

Outside of game day coverage, we get served two types of AFL shows:

1. Chuckling Morons - boofy ex-players, sad comedians, token women, all chortling and overacting. There's a big market for this stuff.
....Bounce, Up The Guts, Footy Show (RIP) The Front Bar, Beep Test, Marngrook Footy Show, Sunday Footy Show.

2. Talkfests - ex-players and journo's look serious, superficial analysis, random stats, gossip, AFL Atrocity of The Week.
....Footy Classified, AFL 360, On The Couch, Talking Footy, On The Mark, Weekend Lowdown.

Serious Analysis - what coaches like Clarkson and assistants like Blake Caracella focus on. Deep breakdowns of teams, oppo, and game plans.
Well beyond the usual trivia of disposals, i50's, stoppages, etc. Most data on TV shows has little correlation to wins. It's fairy floss.
It's not "On The Couch's 'couch gems', a 1 min segment with random AFL stats. Or David King using a few CD stats on 360.

The analysis is analytical and structured. It tells you in depth why teams win, lose, game styles, which players are executing it, or not.

AFL teams do this analysis every week. Where is this on TV?.......... Nowhere.

Yes this could be a boring show unless handled well. Yes this will not appeal to all AFL fans. Yes it will require a brave programming exec.

We have 15+ AFL TV shows. We have fully catered to the needs of stupid people and those who prefer empty but lengthy discussions.

Someone smart and brave in TV Land should see the gap. Fill it with a show focused on serious AFL analysis.

 

[hilly]

Podcasts my good man. Trends (the Marc McGowan one from AFL.com) is a ripper.

 

[Cold Sober]

Podcasts my good man. Trends (the Marc McGowan one from AFL.com) is a ripper.

Bring back World of Sport 60's style. Informative, funny, light entertainment that appealed to all.

 

[Elite Master]

AFL Insider was very analytical with in depth discussion and information breaking down all parts of the game but it only lasted a couple of years before being axed. The networks know that 85% of football fans are bogans and/or simpletons, the programming reflects that.

 

[Ishmael_]

AFL Insider was very analytical with in depth discussion and information breaking down all parts of the game but it only lasted a couple of years before being axed. The networks know that 85% of football fans are bogans and/or simpletons, the programming reflects that.

Is that even true though? We've got an entire generation of football fans playing fantasy, knowing more players and stats than ever before. I think we're just damned by low expectations.

All they need to do is put a smart ex-footballer (difficult), a journalist with a footy brain and a comedian who can vacillate from smart football chat to cracking the occasional joke, someone like Adam Rozenbachs. And perhaps an ex-assistant coach or analyst.

On the couch isn't terrible, but it misses Mike Sheehan. Journalists are relegated to 'newssssssbreaker' or stuck trying to be one of the boys. A Marc McGowan, Travis King or even a Mark Duffield would help immensely. They don't cower or pander to ex-players and provide insight.

 

[GordonStrangler]

Podcasts my good man. Trends (the Marc McGowan one from AFL.com) is a ripper.

Like 'em, but podcasts aren't good for presentation of serious analysis.

TV is vastly better. Video of game situations and player actions, tracking of players, game video and the behind-the goal-cameras.
Also showing and discussing stats for players and teams, with graphs and visuals. Plus diagrams of set plays and strategies.

Something about a picture and 1000 words.

 

[Adelaide Hawk]

AFL Insider was very analytical with in depth discussion and information breaking down all parts of the game but it only lasted a couple of years before being axed. The networks know that 85% of football fans are bogans and/or simpletons, the programming reflects that.

Got it in one. I've stopped watching all football shows because they just drove me up the wall. I realised there must be a market for these types of show, but they weren't for me. Unfortunately, people who really want to think about the game are in a very small minority. It's not just football, most things are marketed towards people who prefer not to think. That's life.

 

[branedotorg]

Preach it OP

 

[StillAtLarge]

5 things I learnt:
Hamish is a campaigner
Hamish is a campaigner
Hamish is a campaigner
Hamish is a campaigner
Hamish is a campaigner

 

[GordonStrangler]

Foxtel is in financial difficulties and will be cutting back. Losing $400m a year will leave a bruise.

My suggestion
....(a) do the Serious Analysis Show (see first post). If it costs a ton of money then you're doing it wrong.
....(b) save money by cutting back on the number of commentators. By a lot.

Apparently AFL games need up to ten commentators and analysts all pontificating on what just happened.
Friday night coverage is ridiculously top heavy. 4 at the ground and another 6 back in the studio. Maybe more. It's hard to keep count

I'm not sure who thinks this yackfest-a-rama adds value. More=better is not the formula that works.

Re-deploy some of these geniuses and money to the Serious Analysis Show. Be smarter about using money and talent, not just cuts.

edit
To predict the complaint :
"Serious analysis? WTF? Most of us at Foxtel have no idea about these new fangled game plans, stats, oppo analysis". Exactly]

 

[Spearman]

Podcasts my good man. Trends (the Marc McGowan one from AFL.com) is a ripper.

thanks for the tip, it is good
ironically I don't usually consume aflDOTcom for footy info/entertainment

 

[Bomberboyokay]

The networks know that 85% of football fans are bogans and/or simpletons, the programming reflects that.

The networks have gotten away with lazy stuff so long they don't put any effort in. America and England are full of stupid people too but their football shows don't avoid strategic stuff.

 

[GordonStrangler]

^^ Great point, especially about lazy networks.

NFL broadcasts cover each game with just 3 people. 2 guys up top (play-by-play and an analyst) and 1 on the sideline for injuries/interviews.
Obviously it's a different game with more actual playing time, but to describe an AFL game apparently needs double

NFL networks take the strategy stuff seriously. In-game analysis is vastly superior to the AFL with guys like Chris Collinsworth giving excellent insights that really add to the broadcast and fan enjoyment. They also do strategy and analysis well, usually in a separate program or segment.

 

[wagstaff]

Foxtel is in financial difficulties and will be cutting back. Losing $400m a year will leave a bruise.

My suggestion
....(a) do the Serious Analysis Show (see first post). If it costs a ton of money then you're doing it wrong.
....(b) save money by cutting back on the number of commentators. By a lot.

Apparently AFL games need up to ten commentators and analysts all pontificating on what just happened.
Friday night coverage is ridiculously top heavy. 4 at the ground and another 6 back in the studio. Maybe more. It's hard to keep count

I'm not sure who thinks this yackfest-a-rama adds value. More=better is not the formula that works.

Re-deploy some of these geniuses and money to the Serious Analysis Show. Be smarter about using money and talent, not just cuts.

edit
To predict the complaint :
"Serious analysis? WTF? Most of us at Foxtel have no idea about these new fangled game plans, stats, oppo analysis". Exactly]

Yeah, agree on the trend of Fox Footy's coverage. It feels just overstuffed with too many people who only get half a minute to say anything, especially when they waste time with self-indulgent nonsense like which pundit got their predictions right. That's one of the reasons why I watch their post-match much less than I used to.

 

[Consolaçao]

Five minutes out from the start of the WC/ dees game last week, viewers were shown iPhone footage of some eagles players who had been momentarily trapped in an elevator earlier that week. Viewers sat there as commentators carried on a lengthy discussion which players they would AND wouldn’t like to be trapped in a lift with, replete with on-screen graphics. With ex-footballers known for their wit, it was obviously very funny.
Meanwhile, the prelim final replay was about to start, Melbourne playing for their season, WC struggling to find form. But let’s talk about elevators.

 

[Minka Beaver]

A show with proper analysis would be fascinating for footy heads, but it's also a marginal interest for either the commercial stations or Foxtel. When you're losing money hand over fist, giving up evening TV slots to people discussing game trends and analysis is not going to cut it. (What they'd probably like to do is produce more documentaries and specials, but they're limited by poor access to the clubs).

The second biggest barrier is that clubs don't want the game covered in depth - there's a trend across the sport to protect game plans like they are Pentagon secrets, rather than being mostly derivatives of the previous premier's tactics.

But a solution is to provide a webcast, which can be streamed, promoted etc through the AFL's website and digital channels. That would work, as an analysis show must be visual and would use accredited journos (such as Marc McGowan) already working on this topic. Give it the AFL imprimatur and have a current player (Jack Riewoldt for example would be perfect) and an aspiring assistant join him. And make it brief - it's a complex and dry subject matter, so leave viewers with one key point to understand each episode.

 

[Lockyer24]

They should look at the Premier league media currently offered under Optus sport.
Daily shoes with analysis, previews, reviews etc
All on demand

Sent from my SM-G955F using Tapatalk

 

[SHAKESPEARE]

Give my "The Gospel"

I liked that show

 

[StillAtLarge]

Foxtel is in financial difficulties and will be cutting back. Losing $400m a year will leave a bruise.

In before they get another govt handout. 30 mil from turnbull, scomo will likely give them even more

 

[mouncey2franklin]

Commercial operators have to appeal to a wide audience base which means lowest common denominator stuff.

Then factor in:

i) Australia is a relatively small country population wise, and of that population, only about half are likely to take any interest in AFL.

ii) Australians are typically not interested in deep analysis of anything, let alone sportsball.

Which means that there is practically zero market for niche material i.e. deep analysis of AFL.

Just the way it is, sadly.

Look at this forum. Bigfooty is the largest AFL forum on the internet today and just look at it.

Detailed analytical OPs on the Main Board are (generally) lucky to receive 50 replies, and of those, most are effectively 'nah you're wrong'.

Idiocracy, my man.

 

[HTPunter]

Football analysis isn't helped by the commentary on game day. There are up to 5 or even 6 commentators per game (including a boundary rider), which means outside of the 2 main callers, there is 4 others who don't have much to add except quick stats. "He has had 15 touches", "he has taken 4 marks" and then maybe 1 quick drawing on a still to demonstrate a lead or a block, which lasts 10 seconds max. Too many talking heads.

Commentary would be ideal with 1 main caller, being a genuine commentator/journalist, 1 ex-footballer attempting to provide the special comments/analysis, and a boundary rider trying to keep track of things on-ground (injury updates etc).

 

[Moggy]

5 things I learnt:
Hamish is a campaigner
Hamish is a campaigner
Hamish is a campaigner
Hamish is a campaigner
Hamish is a campaigner

At least he made it to where he is under his own steam...

Baaaahaaahaaahaa heehee

 

[GordonStrangler]

Make it stop! Make it stop!

The Friday game tonight (Hawks V Coll) had two game commentators (Brian and Bruce) plus Sarah Jones in the studio.

PLUS

Leigh Matthews, Wayne Carey, Matthew Richardson, Nick dal Santo, Jason Dunstall, Nick Riewoldt, David King.

That's TEN freaking people to talk about a football game. Ten.

Why? Why? Why? Who thinks this really adds to the understanding and entertainment? Who thinks fans want this?
Each one gets a sentence or two and then quickly passes the parcel to the next person. It's superficial crap.

What is the name of the FoxFooty genius exec who keeps wasting money on this set-up?

 

[Bristol]

Make it stop! Make it stop!

The Friday game tonight (Hawks V Coll) had two game commentators (Brian and Bruce) plus Sarah Jones in the studio.

PLUS

Leigh Matthews, Wayne Carey, Matthew Richardson, Nick dal Santo, Jason Dunstall, Nick Riewoldt, David King.

That's TEN freaking people to talk about a football game. Ten.

Why? Why? Why? Who thinks this really adds to the understanding and entertainment? Who thinks fans want this?
Each one gets a sentence or two and then quickly passes the parcel to the next person. It's superficial crap.

What is the name of the FoxFooty genius exec who keeps wasting money on this set-up?

While I agree with you, I hope you realise that all those names you bundled together work for two seperate broadcasters. Technically it's not 10 names, it's about five each. Fox Footy have their own programming for pre-game, post-game and half time but they're contractually obliged to take Channel 7's commentary meaning the number of talking heads you see in a broadcast might equal 10, but Fox/Ch7 are only supplying 5 of them each, so that's not their fault.

Also, for all of you people saying how the Americans keep it simple -- bulldust. None of you obviously watch a full match broadcast start-to-finish. Everything they do in America is far more extravagant, the only difference is they have a strong culture of professionalism in the USA which exists across at least 80% of their on-air talent (unlike in Aus where blokey culture and jokey vibes exist everywhere). Two commentators in the box, one on the sideline, and don't forget they also have 4-5 guys sitting on a desk/on the ground for the pre- and post-game, sometimes an NFL Insider like Adam Schefter or Chris Mortensen talking about the latest news, they've begun the trend of having an ex-umpire come in and out to explain on-field decisions, and maybe another reporter on a satellite link if needed (not always the case). In total, they end up using 7-10 on-air talent across a broadcast.

If you want real minimalism, take the Premier League world feed we get on Optus Sport (or even Sky Sports for those who remember the old days of dodgy online streams). 1 commentator, 1 special comms, 1 studio host, 2 studio pundits. 5 people total - that's the standard set up and anything more is for an extraordinary circumstance (like a double header of major derbies/final day of the season etc.)

 

[MortlockWatcher]

Fox Footy should be able to their own commentary for Ch 7 games.
Then you'd instantly reduce the number of talking heads by half and we'd also have a better product by getting rid of nuffies like Ling, BT and Richo.