"Handing the keys to the AFL" - Carlton's situation

[Roylion]

I'm suggesting your notion that 40% of Fitzroy fans leaving the game should have reduced attendances, esp as these games were not replaced

It's not my notion. It was suggested by author Adam Muyt, author of "Maroon and Blue" based on the evidence that he had, that that was the case. Fitzroy Football Club made a similar conclusion.

You said yourself the Fitzroy fan base was small. Just over 104,000 attendees at Fitzroy home games in 1996 with an average of 9,482 per game. If half of those were Fitzroy supporters that means 4,751 supporters. 40% of that is about 1,896. Now of course, the Fitzroy supporters base is larger than that, so that number is going to be larger than 1,896.

However Fitzroy supporters weren't attending games in large numbers anyway towards the end, so 40% of Fitzroy supporters isn't necessarily going to have a huge impact on AFL attendances in Victoria, especially as teams like Hawthorn managed to increase both their memberships and match attendances quite significantly.

Their fans went to other teams, that's all

How many? Who went where? Got any figures?

 

[Ned_Flanders]

It's not my notion. It was suggested by author Adam Muyt, author of "Maroon and Blue" based on the evidence that he had, that that was the case. Fitzroy Football Club made a similar conclusion.

You said yourself the Fitzroy fan base was small. Just over 104,000 attendees at Fitzroy home games in 1996 with an average of 9,482 per game. If half of those were Fitzroy supporters that means 4,751 supporters. 40% of that is about 1,896. Now of course, the Fitzroy supporters base is larger than that, so that number is going to be larger than 1,896.

However Fitzroy supporters weren't attending games in large numbers anyway towards the end, so 40% of Fitzroy supporters isn't necessarily going to have a huge impact on AFL attendances in Victoria, especially as teams like Hawthorn managed to increase both their memberships and match attendances quite significantly.



How many? Who went where? Got any figures?

Don't need to know, we just know the numbers didn't fall by up to 100k, so they obviously moved to other clubs

Jfyi the exact same would happen if it was the Tigs. Some would bitch moan and walk, but most would bitch moan and follow a new team.

 

[Demonic Ascent]

You can't have 2 big clubs such as Essendon and Carlton in the bottom section of the ladder for too long, because the AFL will not make money from the smaller clubs in the competition.

OK then - might want to speak to Richmond about that one.

 

[Roylion]

Don't need to know,

So there's no data to back up your claim.

we just know the numbers didn't fall by up to 100k, so they obviously moved to other clubs

Where's this 100k coming from?

It's not necessarily the case. Other clubs increased their attendances such as Hawthorn. Others may have decided to attend that previously had no previous attendance. You don't know that any increase or maintaining of AFL attendances between 1996-1997 necessarily comes from ex-Fitzroy supporters/members.

fyi the exact same would happen if it was the Tigs. Some would bitch moan and walk, but most would bitch moan and follow a new team.

There's no data to support that.

 

[Papa G]

Telsor should have his ABS figures handy.

 

[Ned_Flanders]

So there's no data to back up your claim.



Where's this 100k coming from?

It's not necessarily the case. Other clubs increased their attendances such as Hawthorn. Others may have decided to attend that previously had no previous attendance. You don't know that any increase or maintaining of AFL attendances between 1996-1997 necessarily comes from ex-Fitzroy supporters/members.



There's no data to support that.

The 100k is your final year attendances

Key point is a club was booted from the league and it didn't hurt the league. As such, the original premise remains, no team is guaranteed its existence in the afl. Not mine, not anyones

 

[Roylion]

The 100k is your final year attendances

Those attendees are not all Fitzroy supporters. Even if half of those 104,000 attendees at Fitzroy games in 1996 were Fitzroy supporters, that's still at least 52,000 Fitzroy game attendees, whose club continued in the AFL in 1997. Probably more than half, given Fitzroy had a small supporter base ravaged further by lack of success and lack of AFL support.

40% of 52,000 Fitzroy supporters works out to roughly just under 21,000. Are you suggesting it's not feasible that 20,000 Fitzroy supporters that were around in 1996, had nothing to do with the AFL in 1997, after their club was forcibly booted from the AFL competition?

Key point is a club was booted from the league and it didn't hurt the league.

Did I say it did? The data that we have is that roughly 60% of Fitzroy supporters continued supporting an AFL club into 1997 and beyond.

As such, the original premise remains, no team is guaranteed its existence in the afl. Not mine, not anyones

Did I say otherwise? I'm still not sure what your premise is. You deny that 40% of Fitzroy supporters walked away from the AFL, yet you can't present any better data than what I've mentioned other than AFL attendances increased in 1997. How do you know that the increase in AFL attendances came about because ex-Fitzroy supporters stayed with the game? Why could that increase have come from other sources, for example as the result of better club marketing, or galvanising of members from other merger proposals in 1996 that failed.?

 

[western royboy]

The 100k is your final year attendances

Key point is a club was booted from the league and it didn't hurt the league. As such, the original premise remains, no team is guaranteed its existence in the afl. Not mine, not anyones

By the time 1996 rolled around, Fitzroy had been shafted by the AFL for so long many supporters (including myself- I was interstate) had become conditioned to the inevitable and simply went the Duran "No mas" . Maybe Fitzroys demise made other supporters of other clubs come out of the woodwork and attend fearing what happened to us could happen to them. No one can prove their point with figures either way - to many intangibles to factor in. However I am confident that the Fitzroy supporter base - which was significantly higher than the membership base split at least into 3 main groups and a significant % did the old car sticker of the day and said "Up Yours Oakley" and walked away from the afl.

 

[telsor]

But that suggests we need to add more teams, and I'm not sure that's a good idea

Well, if people want a team in Tas, we pretty much have to.

 

[telsor]

Telsor should have his ABS figures handy.

Why would I?

Unlike you, I don't make things up to suit.

 

[Ned_Flanders]

By the time 1996 rolled around, Fitzroy had been shafted by the AFL for so long many supporters (including myself- I was interstate) had become conditioned to the inevitable and simply went the Duran "No mas" . Maybe Fitzroys demise made other supporters of other clubs come out of the woodwork and attend fearing what happened to us could happen to them. No one can prove their point with figures either way - to many intangibles to factor in. However I am confident that the Fitzroy supporter base - which was significantly higher than the membership base split at least into 3 main groups and a significant % did the old car sticker of the day and said "Up Yours Oakley" and walked away from the afl.

No argument with any of this

Fwiw I used the attendances purely because it's a tangible stat of action rather than intent

Data asking intent often gets biased by the sample pool you survey, and the perception they wish to create. Like what happened with TC ratings, diaries where chock block with ABC docos, but monitoring devices showed the truth was **** and bums

 

[western royboy]

No argument with any of this

Fwiw I used the attendances purely because it's a tangible stat of action rather than intent

Data asking intent often gets biased by the sample pool you survey, and the perception they wish to create. Like what happened with TC ratings, diaries where chock block with ABC docos, but monitoring devices showed the truth was **** and bums

I don't think there is any malice in the stats quoted by Roylion - I genuinely believe a third went to the Brisbane Lions, a third split between the Roos, Demons & others & the other third just pulled the pin.

 

[Roylion]

I don't think there is any malice in the stats quoted by Roylion - I genuinely believe a third went to the Brisbane Lions, a third split between the Roos, Demons & others & the other third just pulled the pin.

And that's the point. All the evidence (anecdotal) or otherwise (such as a 1998 survey conducted by the Fitzroy Football Club), suggests that a significant proportion of Fitzroy supporters, pulled the pin on AFL for good. Whether it is exactly 33% or 40% will never truly be known. We can only go on the limited collected data from interviews, known membership figures of other clubs that Fitzroy people were known to have joined and crowd attendances of said clubs. For example we do know that the Brisbane Bears 1996 Victorian members went from about 700 to 3,200 in 1997. Those extra 2,500 members were clearly Fitzroy supporters.

 

[Hawkk]

How many members did you have in 2004/05?

Membership has gone up across the league...

Case in point compare / contrast the Demons membership in 2014/15 against the finalling Demon side of 2004/05

2004/05 was of course the Hawks lowest ebb in 60 years...notwithstanding they were in the top bracket for membership in both years

 

[Demonic Ascent]

Membership has gone up across the league...

Case in point compare / contrast the Demons membership in 2014/15 against the finalling Demon side of 2004/05

2004/05 was of course the Hawks lowest ebb in 60 years...notwithstanding they were in the top bracket for membership in both years

But you've got 70K dedicated members who will always renew because they never want the club to be on the brink like '96 again? Bit of fantasy going on there especially considering half your members probably weren't born until the 90's.

 

[Demonic Ascent]

I'm suggesting your notion that 40% of Fitzroy fans leaving the game should have reduced attendances, esp as these games were not replaced

Their fans went to other teams, that's all

What were Fitzroy attendances like in 1996? I'm guessing a lot of supporters had already dropped off by then when they saw the writing on the wall and the white-anting of the AFL.

 

[telsor]

And that's the point. All the evidence (anecdotal) or otherwise (such as a 1998 survey conducted by the Fitzroy Football Club), suggests that a significant proportion of Fitzroy supporters, pulled the pin on AFL for good. Whether it is exactly 33% or 40% will never truly be known. We can only go on the limited collected data from interviews, known membership figures of other clubs that Fitzroy people were known to have joined and crowd attendances of said clubs. For example we do know that the Brisbane Bears 1996 Victorian members went from about 700 to 3,200 in 1997. Those extra 2,500 members were clearly Fitzroy supporters.

I think the biggest 'proof' that a significant number of people were lost to the game is that the AFL has never tried anything close to that again.

Sure they were happy for North to go to the GC, but they certainly didn't pull out the same tactics or look for the same result.

 

[Ned_Flanders]

I think the biggest 'proof' that a significant number of people were lost to the game is that the AFL has never tried anything close to that again.

Sure they were happy for North to go to the GC, but they certainly didn't pull out the same tactics or look for the same result.

No, they just offered them an enormous bucket of cash

Why would they do that if they didn't see a financial benefit in that scenario??

 

[Ned_Flanders]

What were Fitzroy attendances like in 1996? I'm guessing a lot of supporters had already dropped off by then when they saw the writing on the wall and the white-anting of the AFL.

They were 100k as already shown and discussed

 

[Demonic Ascent]

They were 100k as already shown and discussed

How did those attendances compare to previous years? How many of those 100k would have been Fitzroy supporters (i.e. at Fitzroy v Collingwood or Carlton for instance they were probably heavily outnumbered)? How did overall AFL attendances compare in prior years? If Fitzroy's attendances dropped from 1995 to 1996 but AFL attendances rose for the same period then it doesn't really help your argument.

It's that old chestnut, correlation does not equal causation.

 

[Ned_Flanders]

How did those attendances compare to previous years? How many of those 100k would have been Fitzroy supporters (i.e. at Fitzroy v Collingwood or Carlton for instance they were probably heavily outnumbered)? How did overall AFL attendances compare in prior years? If Fitzroy's attendances dropped from 1995 to 1996 but AFL attendances rose for the same period then it doesn't really help your argument.

It's that old chestnut, correlation does not equal causation.

I'll dig this out when I get home, but answer this honestly. Did the league in Melbourne go backwards with one less team it?

It didn't, and it's not about Fitzroy. Richmond could go tomorrow, and we'd be forgotten by years end (at the afl level). With so many teams in Melbourne no team is indispensable, including Carlton

 

[Demonic Ascent]

I'll dig this out when I get home, but answer this honestly. Did the league in Melbourne go backwards with one less team it?

It didn't, and it's not about Fitzroy. Richmond could go tomorrow, and we'd be forgotten by years end (at the afl level). With so many teams in Melbourne no team is indispensable, including Carlton

I don't think the league went backwards without Fitzroy but there were a number of diehard supporters who were disenfranchised with the game/league. Whether that was 30k, 60k or 100k people we can't know for sure.

Regarding my prior point it's not just about 1995 vs 1996, I was using an example to show many Fitzroy supporters may have already fallen off the bandwagon from 1993ish onwards, but one teams crowds going backwards doesn't mean the competitions crowds will go backwards too.

I agree one club isn't bigger than the comp but you need to be careful about a critical mass also. Some supporters would see several Vic clubs go to the wall (Melbourne, North, Dogs, Saints) which in combination could mean a million or so supporters (give or take) disenfranchised with the game. Now a number of those may go on to support other AFL clubs but a proportion of them will be lost to the game. That means less bums on seats, less memberships, less eyes on TV and overall less revenue. This is unlikely to ever occur but this is what we talk about when we talk about clubs being booted or the comp reducing to 14 clubs or what have you. If a club like Carlton is talked about as not being safe (not that I for a second think they would ever be out of the comp) then no one is safe - which was your point initially however this would have a flow on effect likely more dramatic/negative than what would occur if the club/s were supported to get back on their feet in the first place.

EDIT: there is a reason the AFL stopped pushing for rationalisation of Vic clubs following Fitzroy and following the Melbourne Hawks debacle. If you remember back to the time the AFL's mouthpieces in the media (Wilson and Sheahan) would say again and again there were too many Vic clubs and the "goal" was to get down to around 6-8 Vic clubs. You are talking about a million or so supporters give or take with that and I think the AFL realised they were on the wrong track.

 

[Ned_Flanders]

I don't think the league went backwards without Fitzroy but there were a number of diehard supporters who were disenfranchised with the game/league. Whether that was 30k, 60k or 100k people we can't know for sure.

Regarding my prior point it's not just about 1995 vs 1996, I was using an example to show many Fitzroy supporters may have already fallen off the bandwagon from 1993ish onwards, but one teams crowds going backwards doesn't mean the competitions crowds will go backwards too.

I agree one club isn't bigger than the comp but you need to be careful about a critical mass also. Some supporters would see several Vic clubs go to the wall (Melbourne, North, Dogs, Saints) which in combination could mean a million or so supporters (give or take) disenfranchised with the game. Now a number of those may go on to support other AFL clubs but a proportion of them will be lost to the game. That means less bums on seats, less memberships, less eyes on TV and overall less revenue. This is unlikely to ever occur but this is what we talk about when we talk about clubs being booted or the comp reducing to 14 clubs or what have you. If a club like Carlton is talked about as not being safe (not that I for a second think they would ever be out of the comp) then no one is safe - which was your point initially however this would have a flow on effect likely more dramatic/negative than what would occur if the club/s were supported to get back on their feet in the first place.

EDIT: there is a reason the AFL stopped pushing for rationalisation of Vic clubs following Fitzroy and following the Melbourne Hawks debacle. If you remember back to the time the AFL's mouthpieces in the media (Wilson and Sheahan) would say again and again there were too many Vic clubs and the "goal" was to get down to around 6-8 Vic clubs. You are talking about a million or so supporters give or take with that and I think the AFL realised they were on the wrong track.

Good post, but there has to be a line when subsidising clubs is costing the league more than the value they provide

With the luxury tax we already have clubs reducing resources to attempt to stay under it. How much do we hold a league back just so a subsidised team is able to remain viable?

 

[Demonic Ascent]

Good post, but there has to be a line when subsidising clubs is costing the league more than the value they provide

With the luxury tax we already have clubs reducing resources to attempt to stay under it. How much do we hold a league back just so a subsidised team is able to remain viable?

That's another issue and goes back to the heart of the equalisation question. I agree with "equalisation" or parity or whatever you want to call it but I disagree with the luxury tax etc. Again the AFL creates an issue and then puts it back on the clubs to wear it. Same thing as Docklands, AFL has their own contracts there which the clubs then have to fulfill and have no negotiating power as Docklands already has the contract for a number of games each year.

The list of examples would be endless if you went back over the decades.

 

[madmug]

By the time 1996 rolled around, Fitzroy had been shafted by the AFL for so long many supporters (including myself- I was interstate) had become conditioned to the inevitable and simply went the Duran "No mas" . Maybe Fitzroys demise made other supporters of other clubs come out of the woodwork and attend fearing what happened to us could happen to them. No one can prove their point with figures either way - to many intangibles to factor in. However I am confident that the Fitzroy supporter base - which was significantly higher than the membership base split at least into 3 main groups and a significant % did the old car sticker of the day and said "Up Yours Oakley" and walked away from the afl.

That's another issue and goes back to the heart of the equalisation question. I agree with "equalisation" or parity or whatever you want to call it but I disagree with the luxury tax etc. Again the AFL creates an issue and then puts it back on the clubs to wear it. Same thing as Docklands, AFL has their own contracts there which the clubs then have to fulfill and have no negotiating power as Docklands already has the contract for a number of games each year.

The list of examples would be endless if you went back over the decades.

You may agree with parity, but at what point is that a reward for poor performance? In some cases a whole history of poor performances.

Surely the Salary cap & Draft was at least aiming at parity of opportunity. Thats something that never occurred in the VFL. Given that, the results for some clubs haven't changed very much from one administrations set of rules to the next.