What They're Saying - The Bulldogs Media Thread - Part 3

[Mutt]

Love the passion Mutt but respectfully disagree. Media is a business that creates income through marketing. Until such time as we have a much larger supporter base, who are likely to tune in and be influenced by the marketing we are likely to get less air time. I actually think we punch above our weight considering the size of our supporter base. We could definitely be a big club in the next 10 years. The west is growing rapidly and there are many potential new supporters that we could bring into the fold; but it’s going to be sustained on field success, not a bit of extra media coverage that gets us there.

Media coverage is our version of advertising. We should always fight to get the best coverage we can in my view. Your points are all well made and valid though.

Thanks for being respectful in your disagreement with me. It's good to be able to have a rational and polite discussion on here without resorting to hand to hand combat.

 

[hoianbulldog]

Melbourne trounced the dominant team over the last 4 years on Sunday and we pulled away from and easily beat what in reality is a mid-table team unlikely to make finals an eternity ago in the short memory of AFLMedia land.

It's little wonder that all the attention is going to Melbourne. Something that they are entirely deserving of.

We'll get our share of the positive reinforcement that we crave when they dissect the Tigers fall from grace after we put a full stop to it Friday night.

This will be Hawthorn 2016 semi final........respect, but it is over.

Assuming we win of course

 

[dogwatch]

Win flags and get members, then the media will notice.

Hawthorn did it, but it took about 40-50 years. Starting in 1961 when they were very unfashionable and then building on it through the 70s, 80s and well ... in every decade since. They're still not up there with the old firms in terms of membership but they have a pretty significant following and not too bad media profile.

We need to win a couple of flags a decade for the next 30 years to become like Hawthorn. Virtually no chance we'll ever be like Collingwood in terms of public following or media profile.

 

[TMoney22]

Utah Jazz have been the best team all year in the NBA, have one of the best coaching/development teams, a great culture and been fairly successful over a long time. They still don't get the media attention they deserve. It's a fight that will never be won. Best to use it as motivation and keep winning.

 

[Doggies_13]

I get what everyone is saying about the media basically ignoring us, I also don’t see it changing, we only seem to get mentioned when being criticised.

I do get the big clubs get media attention because they have a big fan base and are rich clubs etc. the thing that annoys me with that argument is that the media attention helps those clubs build their fan base and riches. It’s easier to get fans when your in the face of kids constantly.

 

[Dogs_r_barking]

I get what everyone is saying about the media basically ignoring us, I also don’t see it changing, we only seem to get mentioned when being criticised.

I do get the big clubs get media attention because they have a big fan base and are rich clubs etc. the thing that annoys me with that argument is that the media attention helps those clubs build their fan base and riches. It’s easier to get fans when your in the face of kids constantly.

Yes, but in the case of Collingwood this year, who would want that constant negative scrutiny. Look at the Saints they are escaping this type of scrutiny, even though they should be even more under the microscope than Collingwood who were expected to miss the 8, but there was high expectations of the Saints.

 

[Dannnnnnnnnn]

If we can't discuss the media coverage of the Bulldogs on the Media thread, then where can we talk about it? It's a valid subject and not off topic, even if it doesn't interest you.

Anyone is welcome to discuss whatever they like wherever they'd like to; I wasn't saying it was off-topic or invalid. I was just suggesting that separate threads might be better for both parties (e.g. to save those who wish to discuss it from the "who cares" comments, and those who aren't really interested from nightly "no sighting" updates), but no probs if you don't agree.

 

[Doggies_13]

Not directly related to us but what do people make of the push in the media around the high number of injuries across the league and linking it to the shorter preseason and longer game time?

I feel like it doesn’t really correlate as the majority of injuries being used to support it are impact injuries such as concussion, shoulders, ankles etc. if they were using hamstring, calf injuries etc. then maybe you could draw a link but just seems like a bit of an agenda by some sections of the media

 

[Dogs_R_Us]

Not directly related to us but what do people make of the push in the media around the high number of injuries across the league and linking it to the shorter preseason and longer game time?

I feel like it doesn’t really correlate as the majority of injuries being used to support it are impact injuries such as concussion, shoulders, ankles etc. if they were using hamstring, calf injuries etc. then maybe you could draw a link but just seems like a bit of an agenda by some sections of the media

Plus Fagan

 

[Doggies_13]

Plus Fagan

Yeah some coaches have been running with it. Like Fagan when their injuries have been knees and ankles.
Also Dangerfield running with it now when he had an ankle injury. I just don’t see the correlation. Am I missing something?

 

[Sharkey66]

Not directly related to us but what do people make of the push in the media around the high number of injuries across the league and linking it to the shorter preseason and longer game time?

I feel like it doesn’t really correlate as the majority of injuries being used to support it are impact injuries such as concussion, shoulders, ankles etc. if they were using hamstring, calf injuries etc. then maybe you could draw a link but just seems like a bit of an agenda by some sections of the media

there has been a push from some in the media for some time now for shorter games, its all part of that push.

 

[CarnTheScray]

Hawthorn did it, but it took about 40-50 years. Starting in 1961 when they were very unfashionable and then building on it through the 70s, 80s and well ... in every decade since. They're still not up there with the old firms in terms of membership but they have a pretty significant following and not too bad media profile.

We need to win a couple of flags a decade for the next 30 years to become like Hawthorn. Virtually no chance we'll ever be like Collingwood in terms of public following or media profile.

Hawks are weird. Extremely successful but also a very fickle fan base. And they are up there in terms of memberships, even though half are probably junior ones given out.

Our generational support mostly stems from that 54 flag and earlier, where we had the second highest membership at one point despite clubs like Melbourne winning way more at the same time.

Not saying we will be a powerhouse overnight but I think it will be easier for us to gain support over the coming decades than it took Hawthorn.

 

[CarnTheScray]

And turn up big-time on a Friday.

I know its more important to win (of course!) but games like rnd 1 v collingwood and the first 3 qtrs of the gws game are not endearing us to neutral observers.

This Friday probably would’ve been the biggest crowd between the two sides, now it won’t be because of covid. The ticketing sucks.

 

[dogwatch]

Anyone is welcome to discuss whatever they like wherever they'd like to; I wasn't saying it was off-topic or invalid. I was just suggesting that separate threads might be better for both parties (e.g. to save those who wish to discuss it from the "who cares" comments, and those who aren't really interested from nightly "no sighting" updates), but no probs if you don't agree.

One option is to do it in reverse.

Leave this as a general discussion thread for media in the footy(sort of like a Footy Media Watch) but start a new thread called “Bulldog Media Stories” specifically for links to articles about the WB and its players, coaches, etc.

 

[lachy]

If we can't discuss the media coverage of the Bulldogs on the Media thread, then where can we talk about it? It's a valid subject and not off topic, even if it doesn't interest you.

Is it not off topic though Mutt. It is what They're saying about us, not are we getting enough media coverage.

 

[CDBulldog]

Hawks are weird. Extremely successful but also a very fickle fan base. And they are up there in terms of memberships, even though half are probably junior ones given out.

Our generational support mostly stems from that 54 flag and earlier, where we had the second highest membership at one point despite clubs like Melbourne winning way more at the same time.

Not saying we will be a powerhouse overnight but I think it will be easier for us to gain support over the coming decades than it took Hawthorn.

I agree. A sustained period of success and the membership number will grow massively. We are primed to move up the pecking order in terms of size and influence over the coming years...

 

[lachy]

Anyone is welcome to discuss whatever they like wherever they'd like to; I wasn't saying it was off-topic or invalid. I was just suggesting that separate threads might be better for both parties (e.g. to save those who wish to discuss it from the "who cares" comments, and those who aren't really interested from nightly "no sighting" updates), but no probs if you don't agree.

It is a forum so all opinions are valid. It is just they are 2 entirely different topics, both valid. The heading of the thread suggests it is about what the media is saying about us.

What their not saying or the level of coverage is an entirely different and valid topic

 

[BEaston]

"What They're Saying" thread title, not to be taken too literally... It's the media thread. I don't think we need sub-threads for each and every media related topic.

 

[dogwatch]

"What They're Saying" thread title, not to be taken too literally... It's the media thread. I don't think we need sub-threads for each and every media related topic.

Just responding to Dannnn who - IINM - didn't want to wade through a lot of discussion. He just wanted a way to go straight to the latest news articles. Doesn't bother me greatly either way, but everyone's needs are different.

 

[ossie_21]

Anyone is welcome to discuss whatever they like wherever they'd like to; I wasn't saying it was off-topic or invalid. I was just suggesting that separate threads might be better for both parties (e.g. to save those who wish to discuss it from the "who cares" comments, and those who aren't really interested from nightly "no sighting" updates), but no probs if you don't agree.

Me rocking up to the front row of the mod fight

 

[BallaratBulldog]

Not directly related to us but what do people make of the push in the media around the high number of injuries across the league and linking it to the shorter preseason and longer game time?

I feel like it doesn’t really correlate as the majority of injuries being used to support it are impact injuries such as concussion, shoulders, ankles etc. if they were using hamstring, calf injuries etc. then maybe you could draw a link but just seems like a bit of an agenda by some sections of the media

They should stop limiting interchange, decreasing the time between goal and bounce, and ball up is called.

 

[BEaston]

Just responding to Dannnn who - IINM - didn't want to wade through a lot of discussion. He just wanted a way to go straight to the latest news articles. Doesn't bother me greatly either way, but everyone's needs are different.

Whose sentiment I am in turn responding to.

It's a public forum, there's crap in every single thread that not everyone is into. Just skip over those posts, it's pretty easy.

As is always the case with these situations, the Streisand Effect occurs and it ends up being a bigger issue/distraction than it would have been otherwise.

 

[Northernsoul74]

Duryea: We’ll relish the challenge

Defender Taylor Duryea says the challenge of facing Richmond at the MCG this Friday night could be the Western Bulldogs’ greatest test of the season so far.

www.westernbulldogs.com.au

 

[Cadillac]

90 minutes of football analysis on Fox Footy tonight and the Western Bulldogs have not even been mentioned. This is not about flying under the radar...it's about exposure for the club.

The AFL has given us our 4th prime time game of the season. Is it really going to effect the club if we don’t get mentioned on 360?

 

[Kermit]

The AFL has given us our 4th prime time game of the season. Is it really going to effect the club if we don’t get mentioned on 360?

The only issue with this is that none of these are our home games. We sell sponsorship to companies based on exposure and if it’s an away game, the exposure (eg: ground signage) is very limited. We need all the help we can get in promoting the team to attract more and bigger sponsors.