Expansion Armageddon the Doomsday Document

[elbusto]

If so, there are only 2 clubs across 4 football codes that get "big crowds".

exactly - there are virtually no Clubs who get 50,000 regularly!

 

[RUNVS]

If so, there are only 2 clubs across 4 football codes that get "big crowds".

I think all the AFL clubs have got over 50,000 at atleast 1 game during this season.

 

[RUNVS]

exactly - there are virtually no Clubs who get 50,000 regularly!

I think the big 4 get crowds of over 50,000 reasonably regularly (the big 4 are Collingwood, Richmond, Essendon and Carlton). It would be interesting to see what West Coast would get if they had a bigger stadium as currently Subiaco is way too small (in terms of capacity). The Crows also need a bigger stadium as AAMI is way to small for them aswell.

 

[elbusto]

I think all the AFL clubs have got over 50,000 at atleast 1 game during this season.

Regularly would mean more of han than not at a minimum. Which Clubs would get 50,000 every second week or better - Collingwood. Who else?

 

[elbusto]

Regularly would mean more of han than not at a minimum. Which Clubs would get 50,000 every second week or better - Collingwood. Who else?

I just checked - these are the crowds over 50000 this year in the AFL
Best Home & Away Crowds 88,999Collingwood v EssendonM.C.G. 80,310Collingwood v CarltonM.C.G. 78,206Collingwood v GeelongM.C.G. 77,873Carlton v CollingwoodM.C.G. 76,048Hawthorn v CollingwoodM.C.G. 73,503Richmond v CarltonM.C.G. 72,552Richmond v CarltonM.C.G. 70,802Richmond v CollingwoodM.C.G. 64,388Essendon v CarltonM.C.G. 60,333Essendon v RichmondM.C.G. 59,548Melbourne v CollingwoodM.C.G. 59,202Sydney v CollingwoodStadium Australia 59,177Carlton v EssendonM.C.G. 55,658Carlton v St KildaM.C.G. 52,968Collingwood v West CoastM.C.G. 52,592Collingwood v AdelaideM.C.G. 51,990Collingwood v North MelbourneM.C.G. 50,636Geelong v EssendonDocklands

 

[elbusto]

I just checked - these are the crowds over 50000 this year in the AFL
Best Home & Away Crowds 88,999Collingwood v EssendonM.C.G. 80,310Collingwood v CarltonM.C.G. 78,206Collingwood v GeelongM.C.G. 77,873Carlton v CollingwoodM.C.G. 76,048Hawthorn v CollingwoodM.C.G. 73,503Richmond v CarltonM.C.G. 72,552Richmond v CarltonM.C.G. 70,802Richmond v CollingwoodM.C.G. 64,388Essendon v CarltonM.C.G. 60,333Essendon v RichmondM.C.G. 59,548Melbourne v CollingwoodM.C.G. 59,202Sydney v CollingwoodStadium Australia 59,177Carlton v EssendonM.C.G. 55,658Carlton v St KildaM.C.G. 52,968Collingwood v West CoastM.C.G. 52,592Collingwood v AdelaideM.C.G. 51,990Collingwood v North MelbourneM.C.G. 50,636Geelong v EssendonDocklands

The two Clubs averaging over 50000 a game are Collingwood and Carlton - no surprises there

 

[RUNVS]

Regularly would mean more of han than not at a minimum. Which Clubs would get 50,000 every second week or better - Collingwood. Who else?

Number of times they have got over 50,000 this year (im only doing the big 4 as i couldnt be bothered looking at all the other teams as it would take forever).

After 15 Rounds
Collingwood - 11
Carlton - 7
Essendon - 6
Richmond - 5

 

[elbusto]

Number of times they have got over 50,000 this year (im only doing the big 4 as i couldnt be bothered looking at all the other teams as it would take forever).

After 15 Rounds
Collingwood - 11
Carlton - 7
Essendon - 6
Richmond - 5

those figures look right - notice its always the Melbourne Clubs and crowds like that do not guarantee a profit or survival - shows how much all codes are driven by tv deals these days - and thats a bit sad

 

[RUNVS]

those figures look right - notice its always the Melbourne Clubs and crowds like that do not guarantee a profit or survival - shows how much all codes are driven by tv deals these days - and thats a bit sad

Unfortunately Melbourne is one of the only places with a big enough ground to do it. As i said before both AAMI Stadium in Adelaide and Subiaco in Perth need either upgrading or replacing. Luckily they are replacing Subiaco but it wont be ready until 2016 which is way too long. I dont see why it would take 8 years to build a 60,000 seat stadium but thats government red tape for you.

 

[elbusto]

Unfortunately Melbourne is one of the only places with a big enough ground to do it. As i said before both AAMI Stadium in Adelaide and Subiaco in Perth need either upgrading or replacing. Luckily they are replacing Subiaco but it wont be ready until 2016 which is way too long. I dont see why it would take 8 years to build a 60,000 seat stadium but thats government red tape for you.

Thats a huge stadium for Perth. It will fill for local derbies for sure.

 

[RUNVS]

Thats a huge stadium for Perth. It will fill for local derbies for sure.

It will be a great size for regular games but they would need a 90,000 seat stadium to do the local derby justice. Last season West Coast averaged 40,791 for their home games and Fremantle averaged 37,474 for their home games. A local derby would fill a 90,000 seat stadium easily.

 

[cos789]

what is a "big crowd" and how do you determine when you have one and when you don't??? I'd really love to know.

The average crowd for nrl is 16l and for AFL is 36k .
What ever Kadinia Park's capacity is it's smaller than the average for AFL.
Even so it's much more profitable to play at Kadinia Park than the Telstra
Dome even they could get much larger crowds there .

True.
Yeah, so it becomes a delicate balancing act.

The break even point for North Melbourne at the Telstra Dome is
a crowd something like 33k .

Because they were pioneers.

No , because the Sydney Swans were the only VFL side on TV on a Sunday
for quite some time . They were a valuable source of Television revenue to the VFL and then the AFL . Because of this fortnighly exposure the Swans
have a large following around Australia even extending O/S .
Oh , and they were pioneers .

On your flawed logic, lets double the number of teams from 16 to 32 and double everything from crowds to television audiences to broadcast revenue.

My logic isn't flawed . If you ever happen to actually read what I posted
I said there would be 12% increase of AFL on TV .How the public react to
the extra 12% of AFL on TV is open to debate .

West Sydney ARFC.

What pathetic thing are you trying to do .
Name any team with ARFC in it's title
Do you do it because you are ignorant ?
Do you do it because you think it's funny ?
Do you do it because you think it's frustrating ?
I really don't see the purpose in it .

.

 

[akazie]

No wonder this guy has his very own thread at LU

 

[elbusto]

The average crowd for nrl is 16l and for AFL is 36k .
What ever Kadinia Park's capacity is it's smaller than the average for AFL.
Even so it's much more profitable to play at Kadinia Park than the Telstra
Dome even they could get much larger crowds there .



The break even point for North Melbourne at the Telstra Dome is
a crowd something like 33k .



No , because the Sydney Swans were the only VFL side on TV on a Sunday
for quite some time . They were a valuable source of Television revenue to the VFL and then the AFL . Because of this fortnighly exposure the Swans
have a large following around Australia even extending O/S .
Oh , and they were pioneers .



My logic isn't flawed . If you ever happen to actually read what I posted
I said there would be 12% increase of AFL on TV .How the public react to
the extra 12% of AFL on TV is open to debate .



What pathetic thing are you trying to do .
Name any team with ARFC in it's title
Do you do it because you are ignorant ?
Do you do it because you think it's funny ?
Do you do it because you think it's frustrating ?
I really don't see the purpose in it .

.

COS you are a crass bore who writes endless meaningless self serving tripe. Get a life.

 

[Subprime]

COS you are a crass bore who writes endless meaningless self serving tripe. Get a life.

Pot. Kettle. Black.

 

[elbusto]

Pot. Kettle. Black.

Oh dear how hurtful

 

[Rob]

Thats a huge stadium for Perth. It will fill for local derbies for sure.

Not really, it's probably 10-20k under capacity. The Eagles will fill it every game and Freo would do the same if they actually got off the canvas and had a few decent seasons.

 

[cos789]

COS you are a crass bore who writes endless meaningless self serving tripe. Get a life.

Nice rebuttal there . Any advance of verbal abuse .

If you haven't anything intelligent to say ,
in the words of a rl mod "Now bugger off you sook"


The average crowd for nrl is 16l and for AFL is 36k .
What ever Kadinia Park's capacity is it's smaller than the average for AFL.
Even so it's much more profitable to play at Kadinia Park than the Telstra
Dome even they could get much larger crowds there .



The break even point for North Melbourne at the Telstra Dome is
a crowd something like 33k .



No , because the Sydney Swans were the only VFL side on TV on a Sunday
for quite some time . They were a valuable source of Television revenue to the VFL and then the AFL . Because of this fortnighly exposure the Swans
have a large following around Australia even extending O/S .
Oh , and they were pioneers .



My logic isn't flawed . If you ever happen to actually read what I posted
I said there would be 12% increase of AFL on TV .How the public react to
the extra 12% of AFL on TV is open to debate .



What pathetic thing are you trying to do .
Name any team with ARFC in it's title
Do you do it because you are ignorant ?
Do you do it because you think it's funny ?
Do you do it because you think it's frustrating ?
I really don't see the purpose in it .

.

 

[cos789]

I dont see why it would take 8 years to build a 60,000 seat stadium but thats government red tape for you.

One reason is that they're building it at Subiaco .
I don't see why they don't go with the WAFC option which was to upgrade Subiaco - same result much lower lost . Basically to extend the 3 tier stand
around the Northern side . I don't know they don't immediately extend around the Southern side . All they have to do is by air space over a road .

.

 

[Rob]

One reason is that they're building it at Subiaco .
I don't see why they don't go with the WAFC option which was to upgrade Subiaco - same result much lower lost . Basically to extend the 3 tier stand
around the Northern side . I don't know they don't immediately extend around the Southern side . All they have to do is by air space over a road .

.

That wouldn't be the same result. The stands at Subiaco are a disgrace - they need to be demolished.

 

[cos789]

That wouldn't be the same result. The stands at Subiaco are a disgrace - they need to be demolished.

The Northern two tier stand and the Roberts Rd stand , ,yes .

.

 

[Rob]

The Northern two tier stand and the Roberts Rd stand , ,yes .

.

And the 3 tier stand - which is the worst. Leaving just the one stand left. What would be the point of keeping it? You'll still have the same problem of the lack of space on the Roberts Rd side.

 

[cos789]

And the 3 tier stand - which is the worst. Leaving just the one stand left. What would be the point of keeping it? You'll still have the same problem of the lack of space on the Roberts Rd side.

What is the problem with the three tier stand exactly ?

There is no problem with Robert's Rd , if you build over the road as I suggested in the use of air space .In fact very few people realise that the Northern stand is a lot narrower than it should be and it too should have been built out onto the road .

.

 

[Denmark AFL]

RIP Rugby League - the joke sport that nobody gives a shit about

 

[cos789]

RIP Rugby League - the joke sport that nobody gives a shit about

What was the ground you played on in Denmark ?
.