Discussion So I crunched the numbers …. again

[Robertio]

I like 20, it's a sexy round number that's very divisible. And this is all assuming an average post per round

20+ is All-SFA tier
15-19 is great
11-14 is engaged
6-10 is active
1-5 is hardly active
0 is inactive

What minimums of that list would we consider a "healthy" team to have?

At the Royals we have 5 posters who'll do 80 and over every week and I'd be over the moon if i could get another 10 to do 15-19 and 5 more to do 10-15, we don't have that yet but I'll be looking at that when recruiting.

 

[Millky95]

Minimum of 5 in each category except the inactive one would be ideal.

You need 5 elite to nominate for all-SFA and there are varying stages of engaged that are perfectly acceptable, so an even spread across the other rankings would be a healthily active club.

Let's go with:
5 All-SFA tier
5 Great
3 Engaged
3 Active
4 Hardly Active
And the middle of each posting range (assuming the All SFA stay at 20) would get you: 19 players per week for 286 posts per week.

I wonder how many clubs hit those numbers

 

[Robertio]

Let's go with:
5 All-SFA tier
5 Great
3 Engaged
3 Active
4 Hardly Active
And the middle of each posting range (assuming the All SFA stay at 20) would get you: 19 players per week for 286 posts per week.

I wonder how many clubs hit those numbers

Yeah gives us something to aim for but numbers all depends on the opposition as well and how the matchthread is going, like in the 2nd half of the season after i joined Royals played Bears, Bombers, Demons and OOB's all in a row and the numbers were great with all teams pretty even.

 

[Falconista]

I like 20, it's a sexy round number that's very divisible. And this is all assuming an average post per round

20+ is All-SFA tier
15-19 is great
11-14 is engaged
6-10 is active
1-5 is hardly active
0 is inactive

What minimums of that list would we consider a "healthy" team to have?

Always think number of contributors trumps post numbers in terms of health of a list.

If you have at least 15 contributors per week and average 18+ for the season, you're in bombastic shape. Average about 16 and you're in a heathy state.

 

[Tonga Bob]

you're in bombastic shape.

 

[Hydatina Physis]

Nah make them earn it mate.

They earned it by playing well. I do understand the posting component but what's the argument against an All-SFA posting and an All-SFA stats as separate teams?

 

[Robertio]

They earned it by playing well. I do understand the posting component but what's the argument against an All-SFA posting and an All-SFA stats as separate teams?

No idea mate would be interesting though.

 

[Hydatina Physis]

No idea mate would be interesting though.

Agreed.

 

[Robertio]

Agreed.

You're going to get a few who were up near the top in stats missing out because of lack of posting and vice versa, was always a tough job when i was on the committee

 

[Kilroy]

You're going to get a few who were up near the top in stats missing out because of lack of posting and vice versa, was always a tough job when i was on the committee

Done the footwork on that here Robertio …

Resource - S40 Prime Cuts - the ALL-SFA Primer

At Baghdad we go bear bare on Thursday Yes I know I quoted myself, but…. just want to say, you’ll find some ‘Prime Cuts’ there 😉

www.bigfooty.com

 

[Kilroy]

Always think number of contributors trumps post numbers in terms of health of a list.

If you have at least 15 contributors per week and average 18+ for the season, you're in bombastic shape. Average about 16 and you're in a heathy state.

Ask and you shall receive …

Here’s each team’s average number of “unique” posters per round in S40

• 19.5 Demons / week
• 18.3 Warriors / week
• 18.2 Bears / week
• 17.5 Bombers / week
• 16.8 Royals / week
• 16.4 OOBs / week
• 13.8 Gumbies / week
• 13.3 Wonders / week
• 11.9 Roys / week
• 11.7 Dragons / week
• 11.3 Swamprats / week
• 9.9 Hawks / week
• 7.7 Furies / week

TOTAL 186.3 / week (league-wide)

 

[Raz]

Shame no rule for no post no play

But I am mean

 

[sabso]

Shame no rule for no post no play

But I am mean

I’m all for this, easy 4 pts vs the furies

And half the other teams

 

[Raz]

I’m all for this, easy 4 pts vs the furies

And half the other teams

Merge teams with insufficient regular participation

 

[Kilroy]

Waiting for someone to write the Furies need to fold thread.

From Bob’s posting thread about getting “inactives” engaged again.

The only reason they are active again is because of history with the club and through relationships with other people at the club, otherwise they would remain inactive or retired. So no, we haven't taken any opportunities from other clubs. In fact what's stopping other clubs from doing the same thing with their inactive listed people?

And good on them. Maybe ask why they have that many, and then replicate that at other clubs. But really as Millky95 said, what's the harm?

Are you interested in talking about this with other teams publicly or privately Shaun?

 

[Kilroy]

No worries Kilroy. While I could never hit those numbers and not burn out, I do admire how the Bombers seem to all get on the same page. Playing the Bombers does feel like playing a team as opposed to some other clubs.

Thanks for pointing that out.

I come here as a shit talker not a Gumbie. Don't wish ill onto those beautiful blue freaks just because of me.

The Bombers played the Gumbies twice this season within around 5 weeks and it all was in good humour and both threads bubbled along nicely.

Your team certainly puts up consistency in quality and in numbers and you even got a bit more active as the season went on.

 

[Hydatina Physis]

Your team certainly puts up consistency in quality and in numbers and you even got a bit more active as the season went on.

 

[Kilroy]

Updated average unique posters per week for each team S37-S40

Team	S37	S38	S39	S40
Bears	18.8	17.9	20.5	18.2
Bombers	16.4	15.7	18.1	17.5
Demons	18.9	18.4	20.8	19.5
Dragons	15.8	9.8	10	11.7
Furies	10.7	7.1	12.5	7.7
Gumbies	11.7	9.4	10.8	13.8
Hawks	14.3	10.6	12	9.9
OOBs	14.8	16.3	17.2	16.4
Royals	15.7	16.4	16.5	16.8
Roys	17.4	14.3	16	11.9
Swamprats	11.3	14.1	9.9	11.3
Warriors	16.9	16.1	16.8	18.3
Wonders	15.9	15.6	13.5	13.3
LEAGUE TOTAL/wk	198.6	181.7	194.6	186.3

… as compared to …

	S34	S35	S36
BOM	17.25	14.63	14.79
CIW	16	17.63	18.71
DEM	12.92	20.13	21.36
FUR	12.92	11.31	13
GCR	16	18.5	14.93
GUM	14.83	12.19	11.07
HAW	17.25	11.13	10.64
LVB	13.25	19.69	19.21
ROY	17.58	15.19	14.57
SCS	12.92	13.25	12.57
SDR	12.5	12.88	17.29
WON	18.67	17.38	17.43
OOB	15.08	16.25	14.5

Total

197.17

200.16

200.07

*Using Kennedy Parker ‘s raw data

S35 - the season after the OOBs were absorbed into the competition - would appear to be peak “unique”.

 

[ShaunDuggan]

Updated average unique posters per week for each team S37-S40

Team	S37	S38	S39	S40
Bears	18.8	17.9	20.5	18.2
Bombers	16.4	15.7	18.1	17.5
Demons	18.9	18.4	20.8	19.5
Dragons	15.8	9.8	10	11.7
Furies	10.7	7.1	12.5	7.7
Gumbies	11.7	9.4	10.8	13.8
Hawks	14.3	10.6	12	9.9
OOBs	14.8	16.3	17.2	16.4
Royals	15.7	16.4	16.5	16.8
Roys	17.4	14.3	16	11.9
Swamprats	11.3	14.1	9.9	11.3
Warriors	16.9	16.1	16.8	18.3
Wonders	15.9	15.6	13.5	13.3
LEAGUE TOTAL/wk	198.6	181.7	194.6	186.3

Waiting for someone to write the Furies need to fold thread.

 

[Kilroy]

Waiting for someone to write the Furies need to fold thread.

Overall a slightly stronger year (S39/S40) than last year (S37/S38)

A consistent pattern of losing a bit of interest in the latter half of the year, but generally there’s continuity.

The obvious question is do you need any support or just for people to deal with it?

 

[ClarkeM]

Updated average unique posters per week for each team S37-S40

Team	S37	S38	S39	S40
Bears	18.8	17.9	20.5	18.2
Bombers	16.4	15.7	18.1	17.5
Demons	18.9	18.4	20.8	19.5
Dragons	15.8	9.8	10	11.7
Furies	10.7	7.1	12.5	7.7
Gumbies	11.7	9.4	10.8	13.8
Hawks	14.3	10.6	12	9.9
OOBs	14.8	16.3	17.2	16.4
Royals	15.7	16.4	16.5	16.8
Roys	17.4	14.3	16	11.9
Swamprats	11.3	14.1	9.9	11.3
Warriors	16.9	16.1	16.8	18.3
Wonders	15.9	15.6	13.5	13.3
LEAGUE TOTAL/wk	198.6	181.7	194.6	186.3

So first half of the year turns to be more fruitful for us as a league.

 

[ClarkeM]

Waiting for someone to write the Furies need to fold thread.

Furies need to fold

 

[Kilroy]

So first half of the year turns to be more fruitful for us as a league.

 

[Grav]

Waiting for someone to write the Furies need to fold thread.

Nice melt!….


Not really, but I’ve always wanted to say that

 

[Tarkyn_24]

At the Royals we have 5 posters who'll do 80 and over every week and I'd be over the moon if i could get another 10 to do 15-19 and 5 more to do 10-15, we don't have that yet but I'll be looking at that when recruiting.

At the Hawks we do 80 and over some weeks.