Are these figures right?

[legend166]

I think it's probably a combination of all of these:

1. The Comm Games sucked up viewers for a couple of weeks.

2. Whether real or perceived, the media has pushed the narrative that the game is in horrible shape and so it's become accepted - that's going to impact viewers.

3. The Channel 7 coverage seems to have reached its nadir after the exit of Commetti.

4. Just terrible, terrible fixturing by the AFL with regards to prime time matches. They need to stop trying to predict the sides who will improve dramatically (like they did with Carlton and St Kilda this year) and just do it based on the performance of the previous year. Sure you'll still get your sliders down the ladder but on the flip side we won't end up with the amount of Carlton games in prime time. You would have thought after the debacle of 2014 and 2015 where they had a combined 14 Thursday/Friday night games in two seasons where they won a total of 11 games they would have learnt their lesson. I actually think that 2015 season did long lasting damage to the Friday night footy brand it was so bad. I'd love to see someone do a comparison of Friday night figure pre-2015 and post 2015. The_Wookie any chance I'm right here?

5. Speaking of branding, I think the AFL is at an all time low. This could just be me projecting, but I have to think in terms of 'authenticity' no one takes the brand seriously right? I mean, something like AFLX is just such a cynical marketing exercise with its Zooper goals and all around horribleness how does it not do damage to the AFL brand as a serious sporting competition?

6. I know it sounds counter-intuitive since a lot of this is driven by lower Victoria viewer numbers, but the turn inward over the last five years towards Victoria doesn't help when some of the big Victorian sides suck. Namely Carlton, Essendon and to a lesser extent Collingwood (what's weird about them is they're having a decent season but a large part of their fanbase seems completely disengaged). It's a lot more difficult to get Victorian fans excited for West Coast vs Adelaide when the league itself has such an obvious slant towards Victorian teams and matters. So when interest in Victorian sides falls away because they're stinking it up, there's nothing left to sustain interest. The league has gone backwards in this regard under Gilligan.

 

[Lavender Bushranger]

Hang on, is the direction this discussion has taken, actually the crux of the matter?


Is the reason the AFL is on the nose, because it's so contrived? Because it is not a 'competition' any more? Because the fixture is not random, but is instead maximised for business purposes?

Is it possible that that is actually why people have turned off and tuned out of the game? Have people lost interest, because it's not emotional anymore? Because they aren't clubs anymore - but instead they're 'brands'? Because the game is not a competition, but instead a 'product'?

And yet here we are, trying to fix the problem by further dragging the game away from being a competition, and closer to being nothing more than a reality TV show?


Maybe, just maybe, if the AFL reverted somewhat back to putting the integrity of a tribal sporting competition first - people would be more interested? Maybe if they backed off on the commercial aspect a bit, stopped referring to the footy ground as the players' 'workplace', stopped giving each other million dollar bonuses, stopped changing fundamental rules to appease TV audiences, stopped rigging the draw to suit the 'big clubs' - people would actually re-engage with the sport and start watching it again?


Maybe that's what people want? Maybe there is already a saturation of 'sports entertainment products' out there, and people have grown weary of them? Maybe we want a true, fair sporting comp with real clubs to barrack for?





Man, that's a lot of question in there.

 

[Maylandsman]

Is that correct?

100%. only concern is when game is delayed.

 

[Firestarter]

Looking at the VIC sides in order of finishing position last year

Richmond
2 Thursday night games
1 Tuesday night

So the reigning premiers only had 3 primetime games

Geelong
1 Monday game
1 Saturday night
1 Friday night

3 primetime free-to-air games

Essendon
1 Friday night
2 Saturday night
1 ANZAC day game

4 primetime games

Melbourne
1 Tuesday night game

1 primetime game

Bulldogs
3 Friday night

3 prime time games

St Kilda
1 Friday
4 Saturday night

5 prime time games

Hawthorn
1 Friday night
2 Saturday night
1 Monday game

4 prime time games

Collingwood
3 Friday night
1 ANZAC day game
2 Saturday night

6 primetime games

North Melbourne
1 Friday
1 Saturday night

2 primetime games

Carlton
1 Thursday
2 Friday night
2 Saturday night

Carlton have had 5 primetime games and they are about to add another Friday night game.

The top 4 Victorian teams of last year had less prime time games than Carlton and St Kilda so far. Between them, they've only had 1 Friday night game. Bulldogs and Carlton (including this week) will have had 3 each. They wonder why ratings are down?

And that Friday is the marquee we are entitled to have because we rallied for it long before AFL decided it was yet another game they could milk.

No I do not expect to keep it because all anyone cares about is how many Centrelink queuing dropkicks are filling seats than anything else. Which is why we have the Carlton favouritism.

 

[Sedat!]

Footy fans should take this moment to lobby to have the imbecile Taylor removed.

If you listen to BT circa 2011 on Fox Footy it is almost like a completely different person. He was a great caller but he's been well and truly ch 7'd.

That sh*tstain of a network cover the footy like it is one of their piece of s**t reality TV shows. They prioritise their commentators as the stars of the show at the expense of the actual players. And they go into every match with a pre-conceived narrative that is designed for the most basic of footy fans and then ram that narrative down our throats for the next 2 hours. There is no analysis of the game trends other than the bleeding obvious (Ling - gee Selwood always goes in hard). I hate those bastards and what they've done to the AFL coverage.

Fox Footy is far from perfect but at least they try to analyse the actual game and why certain players and clubs are succeeding/failing. Sometimes it's stats overkill but I'll take that over the alternative every day of the week. It's time for Fox to have their own commentary team for every match and not bother to take the ch.7 feed.

 

[MaddAdam]

If you listen to BT circa 2011 on Fox Footy it is almost like a completely different person. He was a great caller but he's been well and truly ch 7'd.

That sh*tstain of a network cover the footy like it is one of their piece of s**t reality TV shows. They prioritise their commentators as the stars of the show at the expense of the actual players. And they go into every match with a pre-conceived narrative that is designed for the most basic of footy fans and then ram that narrative down our throats for the next 2 hours. There is no analysis of the game trends other than the bleeding obvious (Ling - gee Selwood always goes in hard). I hate those bastards and what they've done to the AFL coverage.

Fox Footy is far from perfect but at least they try to analyse the actual game and why certain players and clubs are succeeding/failing. Sometimes it's stats overkill but I'll take that over the alternative every day of the week. It's time for Fox to have their own commentary team for every match and not bother to take the ch.7 feed.

Couldn't agree more - very well posted. And the narrative is sub-BigFootyesque in its simplicity and stupidity.

I do think BT has to take some personal responsibility - he's clearly decided to go down this path himself.

 

[greatwhiteshark]

Not having a go at you but that assumes that all WA and SA supporters didn't already have a team before Freo, West Coast, Power and Crows joined the VFL. This is clearly not the case. Most would have had a VFL team as well as a WAFL or SANFL team.
Qld and NSW are different again with existing VFL teams relocating.

Most did not have a team in the VFL. We watched the winners because it was on but the only football league that was of any importance to us was the WAFL.
Like I watch the odd game of the premier league soccer because it is on, I lean towards Man United but I don’t follow or really support them.
Now I am sure Victorians living in WA followed the VFL and of course some WA people would of but it was a small minority. And if anything they just sort of followed where the WAFL stars went and played.

 

[AcuteWhistle]

If you listen to BT circa 2011 on Fox Footy it is almost like a completely different person. He was a great caller but he's been well and truly ch 7'd.

That sh*tstain of a network cover the footy like it is one of their piece of s**t reality TV shows. They prioritise their commentators as the stars of the show at the expense of the actual players. And they go into every match with a pre-conceived narrative that is designed for the most basic of footy fans and then ram that narrative down our throats for the next 2 hours. There is no analysis of the game trends other than the bleeding obvious (Ling - gee Selwood always goes in hard). I hate those bastards and what they've done to the AFL coverage.

Fox Footy is far from perfect but at least they try to analyse the actual game and why certain players and clubs are succeeding/failing. Sometimes it's stats overkill but I'll take that over the alternative every day of the week. It's time for Fox to have their own commentary team for every match and not bother to take the ch.7 feed.

x2

How a 'caller' like Basil can still get a gig says it all really. Fox also has it's issues but they pale in comparison. I refuse to listen to 7 anymore especially when it's not that hard to setup workable &, for the most part, enjoyable alternatives.

 

[vozzon]

Has the 2 new teams affected average ratings at all? Also with so much footy on atm its impossible to have audiences for every game. I still love watching footy over other sports and follow every game as i have a few draft leagues but it gets to much on a weekend as there isnt enough time. Would it be worth scheduling games more often on Monday and Thursday nights?

 

[HPKS]

Most did not have a team in the VFL. We watched the winners because it was on but the only football league that was of any importance to us was the WAFL.
Like I watch the odd game of the premier league soccer because it is on, I lean towards Man United but I don’t follow or really support them.
Now I am sure Victorians living in WA followed the VFL and of course some WA people would of but it was a small minority. And if anything they just sort of followed where the WAFL stars went and played.

This is so true n a lot of Victorians, especially younger ones, don’t understand it. I watched the winners if the old man was pissed n dragged me outa bed at 12 on a Saturday night to watch it but the VFL was not people’s utopia. Changed slightly when we started to get swans game on tv every second Sunday. But it wasn’t the main footy fix.


It was just another league who the majority had no connection with.

 

[Rabman]

Think the ratings will pick up, Rounds 12-17 have some pretty good prime time match ups upcoming.

 

[greatwhiteshark]

things I don’t care about or pay any attention to in regards to football.

TV ratings
AFL and club administrators who are paid to tell us what they think we want to hear and not the truth.
How many interchange there are.

Only care whether we win or lose. The rest is social media crap.

 

[Demonic Ascent]

By far the biggest drop-off in audience has been in Victoria, so this argument doesn't stand up as a factor.

Agreed, it's AFL decisions which do adversely impact non-Vic supporters/clubs but not only them. It's just the same old s**t all the time. The AFL have absolutely no idea how to run a professional competition, they'd probably great at running a fast food franchise though.

 

[Demonic Ascent]

Friday night games need to be largely reserved for top 10 sides. Victorian sides playing each other at the MCG or Etihad, and interstate sides playing anyone at home. Bottom 8 sides maybe 1-2 per season.

When was the last time we had a derby or showdown on Friday night? Last showdown was hidden away at twilight on Foxtel while Saturday night had two snorefests in dogs/lions and Freo/Saints.

 

[precarious]

Also...if they are talking about the FTA average per game, does that mean if different games are shown on Saturday nights depending on mark, it is split between 2 games and thus reported as a lower average than a single NRL game shown in all markets, despite perhaps a higher total audience?

Yes, I think this is the crux of it. Masters does actually allude to it in passing. By focusing on ratings per game, this favors the NRL. Free to air, the NRL usually has just three games, shown nationally; the AFL has most games shown somewhere, but not everywhere. On Fox, AFL has overlapping games whereas the NRL does not.

From a network's perspective, ratings per time slot is more relevant. It is beneficial to Seven that it can code two different games to two different markets as the same program.

Think the ratings will pick up, Rounds 12-17 have some pretty good prime time match ups upcoming.

Agreed. The timing of Masters' report was probably no coincidence. The NRL has heavily front-loaded its season with quite a few of its big match-ups having already been played twice. Of course, the AFL's schedule is also front-loaded, but not to that extent. And, as you say, AFL ratings prospects look quite promising over the next phase of the season with some appealing Thursday and Friday night games.

 

[Rob]

The AFL with it's s**t Friday night game:
FTA: 517k
STV: 243k
(over 3 hours)

NRL (3rd v 6th)
FTA: 376k
STV: 221k
(over 2 hours)

And this isn't an unusual result.

Let's not give Masters too much credence here.

 

[Rabman]

The AFL with it's s**t Friday night game:
FTA: 517k
STV: 243k
(over 3 hours)

NRL (3rd v 6th)
FTA: 376k
STV: 221k
(over 2 hours)

And this isn't an unusual result.

Let's not give Masters too much credence here.

NRL people will point towards regional's.

 

[The_Wookie]

The NRL cover their bases far better. Almost always stand alone Thursday night means they often corner the market there, two Friday night games allows them to broadcast the better option per state (ie. Storm in Victoria, Broncos in QLD, etc). They actually try to maximise their viewership, meanwhile the AFL has regularly had dud contests on FTA. It also doesn't help that the AFL has far greater attendance to it's matches, which draws away TV viewers, but that is the least of concerns here. Simple fact is the NRL are playing their cards far better than the AFL and it's starting to show.

The NRL caters to its broadcasts, its evident in its Thursday and Friday 6pm attendances. The fact remains the AFL and its clubs make more money from non tv sources than comes in through TV. TV revenues account for just over half of the league HQ income, but less than 1/4 of even a small clubs revenue is derived from the rights.

 

[The_Wookie]

The AFL with it's s**t Friday night game:
FTA: 517k
STV: 243k
(over 3 hours)

NRL (3rd v 6th)
FTA: 376k
STV: 221k
(over 2 hours)

And this isn't an unusual result.

Let's not give Masters too much credence here.

Lets not forget too that Seven dont care about the average broadcast in an individual market, they care about the overall ratings slot for the broadcast nationally - and Seven says its beating the NRL and Nine in this area (623k average to 611k).

 

[The_Wookie]

NRL people will point towards regional's.

AFL people can point at the fact that broadcasters have consistently paid more for AFL content for over 30 years.

 

[abcde12345]

Is there a particular aversion we have as Australian Rules fans to the Thursday night and Monday night time slots? The few Thursday night slots they play seem to rate reasonably well, haven't really seen any trends in relation to Monday night football though. I'm surprised the AFL doesn't try and make it an event similar to what Friday night football should be, rather than giving the NRL a free kick with no sport to contest it most weeks. Maybe there is some other factor I haven't considered?...

 

[The_Wookie]

Is there a particular aversion we have as Australian Rules fans to the Thursday night and Monday night time slots? The few Thursday night slots they play seem to rate reasonably well, haven't really seen any trends in relation to Monday night football though. I'm surprised the AFL doesn't try and make it an event similar to what Friday night football should be, rather than giving the NRL a free kick with no sport to contest it most weeks. Maybe there is some other factor I haven't considered?...

Ratings were never the issue for Sunday nights/Monday nights and arent the issue on Thursdays. Its attendances. Ratings are fine, but Monday nights floundered after a few, like Sunday nights did, and doesnt want Thursdays to go the same way, which is why they are used sparingly. When the AFL dropped Monday night/Sunday night games, Mclachlan was very clear on the fact that the AFL considers attendance just as important as TV Ratings.

And theres a reason for that - so much revenue for the clubs and league is tied up in attendance - membership alone was $240 million last year across the clubs, then theres AFL members, general admission ticketing, corporate boxes, onsite merchandise sales, signage, pourage, catering and more that would comfortably push that over the 400 million mark across the league, making it just as valuable as the current tv rights deal.

 

[abcde12345]

Ratings were never the issue for Sunday nights/Monday nights and arent the issue on Thursdays. Its attendances. Ratings are fine, but Monday nights floundered after a few, like Sunday nights did, and doesnt want Thursdays to go the same way, which is why they are used sparingly. When the AFL dropped Monday night/Sunday night games, Mclachlan was very clear on the fact that the AFL considers attendance just as important as TV Ratings.

And theres a reason for that - so much revenue for the clubs and league is tied up in attendance - membership alone was $240 million last year across the clubs, then theres AFL members, general admission ticketing, corporate boxes, onsite merchandise sales, signage, pourage, catering and more that would comfortably push that over the 400 million mark across the league, making it just as valuable as the current tv rights deal.

Makes perfectly good sense. I would like for the AFL to slowly work on building in a new prime time slot to the schedule, as it feels somewhat crowded to me the way it is presently, but that may be the purpose of the slow introduction of Thursday night football.

 

[Our Game]

"I don't watch nearly as many games as I used to. I don't hate the brand of footy being played in the league at the moment, but it's not great and skill level league wide seems to be down. The reason I mostly don't w
watch is how it's presented. Odds of having a game with a decent commentary panel are slim to none, the games themselves are called like s**t, and it's like watching a bunch of mates talk s**t about how good they used to be.

Im with you 100% both Ch 7 and the AFL should be worried as the brand is starting to look stale.