eppinggas
Administrator
Ian Alexander
Don't care
Joined: June 2014
Posts: 8,612 
|
Post by eppinggas on Jan 22, 2019 9:45:52 GMT
I always thought that there was always a fairly direct correlation between average home league attendances and average league position. So using attendance figures from 1921 and the Sky 50 year "ultimate league"... this is what I found. (Yes, I know it's two different time periods, but whatever)... I could only run the analysis over 89 Clubs.
The 8 top best attended Clubs are also the top 8 sides in the ultimate league.
The average variance over 89 Clubs in relation to average attendance/average position is 6.6 places.
For the top 20 attended Clubs the average variance is 3.8
For the next 21-45 attended Clubs the average variance is 7.0
For the next 46-70 attended Clubs the average variance is 5.7
Below this the variance climbs as generally "poorly" attended Clubs tend to outperform. eg Shrewsbury +14: 80th by attendance, 66th by league record.
The following 31 Clubs are exactly where they "should be", or within 3 or less places:
Man Utd -2
Arsenal 0
Liverpool 2
Everton 0
Spurs 2
Man City 0
Chelsea 2
A Villa 1
Leeds -1
West Ham 2
Leicester 0
West Brom -1
M’borough 3
Derby -1
Stoke -1
Blackburn 3
Fulham -3
Charlton 3
sh*t -1
Hull -2
Reading 3
Notts Cty -1
The Gas -3
Wigan -3
Port Vale -1
Southend -1
Chesterfield -2
Mansfield 1
Exeter 0
York 1
Wycombe 0
The biggest "underperformers" in the top 3 divisions are:
Wolves -13
Sheffield Weds -14
Birmingham -10
Cardiff -10
Preston -11
Plymouth -10
Doncaster -10
Northampton -10
The biggest "overperformers" in the top 3 divisions are:
Southampton 13
Ipswich 12
QPR 17
Watford 12
Bournemouth 10
Conclusion.
I thought that The Gas were "underperforming". We're not. We're where we "should" be. As are the sh*t.
The data suggests that that the only way to gain a sustainable higher place in the pyramid is to increase the size of the average home gate.
For that Bristol Rovers will need to build a new stadium, or to substantially redevelop the Memorial Stadium. No sh*t Shylock.
|
|
Deleted
Joined: January 1970
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 26, 2019 12:24:52 GMT
I always thought that there was always a fairly direct correlation between average home league attendances and average league position. So using attendance figures from 1921 and the Sky 50 year "ultimate league"... this is what I found. (Yes, I know it's two different time periods, but whatever)... I could only run the analysis over 89 Clubs. The 8 top best attended Clubs are also the top 8 sides in the ultimate league. The average variance over 89 Clubs in relation to average attendance/average position is 6.6 places. For the top 20 attended Clubs the average variance is 3.8 For the next 21-45 attended Clubs the average variance is 7.0 For the next 46-70 attended Clubs the average variance is 5.7 Below this the variance climbs as generally "poorly" attended Clubs tend to outperform. eg Shrewsbury +14: 80th by attendance, 66th by league record. The following 31 Clubs are exactly where they "should be", or within 3 or less places: Man Utd -2 Arsenal 0 Liverpool 2 Everton 0 Spurs 2 Man City 0 Chelsea 2 A Villa 1 Leeds -1 West Ham 2 Leicester 0 West Brom -1 M’borough 3 Derby -1 Stoke -1 Blackburn 3 Fulham -3 Charlton 3 sh*t -1 Hull -2 Reading 3 Notts Cty -1 The Gas -3 Wigan -3 Port Vale -1 Southend -1 Chesterfield -2 Mansfield 1 Exeter 0 York 1 Wycombe 0 The biggest "underperformers" in the top 3 divisions are: Wolves -13 Sheffield Weds -14 Birmingham -10 Cardiff -10 Preston -11 Plymouth -10 Doncaster -10 Northampton -10 The biggest "overperformers" in the top 3 divisions are: Southampton 13 Ipswich 12 QPR 17 Watford 12 Bournemouth 10 Conclusion. I thought that The Gas were "underperforming". We're not. We're where we "should" be. As are the sh*t. The data suggests that that the only way to gain a sustainable higher place in the pyramid is to increase the size of the average home gate. For that Bristol Rovers will need to build a new stadium, or to substantially redevelop the Memorial Stadium. No sh*t Shylock. Wonder what happens when you dig a bit deeper and look at the number of supporters that clubs take to showpiece matches and also throw in how many clubs there are in each club's catchment area and look at how many other clubs share what population. I'll bet that we have more available local support than a club like Chelsea, just off the top of my head, they have QPR, Fulham and Brentford all within a 10 minute walk. What's the total population of all of the BS post codes, I think it's in excess of 1 million people, between 2 League clubs. We get, on a good day, 9000 people, out of our 50% of a million people. Not great, is it. The apologists for the pathetic way Rovers is managed often use as an excuse for poor recruitment the fact that other areas have multiple clubs in close proximity, so players can pursue a career without moving (complete twaddle of course, most players will kiss any badge as long as the length of contract and wage are sufficient) all this argument does is demonstrate that other clubs compete with us with fewer available supporters. It's a kind of 'Lazy journalism' to look at the headline figure of how many people turn up to watch a ball get kicked up in the air for 90 minutes and then us lose 1-0 to Wycombe Wanderers and then to say that the reason we are a rubbish 3rd tier team is because we don't get footfall. I would say that we don't get footfall because we make absolutely zero effort to market the product and because the experience and the stadium are rubbish. |
|
eppinggas
Administrator
Ian Alexander
Don't care
Joined: June 2014
Posts: 8,612
|
Post by eppinggas on Jan 26, 2019 13:02:09 GMT
Don't disagree that we have a lot of 'potential' to increase gates. However our capacity at the Mem is effectively around 11,500 (I think). So it's a moot point...
|
|
Deleted
Joined: January 1970
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 26, 2019 13:51:56 GMT
Don't disagree that we have a lot of 'potential' to increase gates. However our capacity at the Mem is effectively around 11,500 (I think). So it's a moot point... We could easily increase capacity. BCC have never refused any of the planning applications put forward by Rovers, including the batsh1t crazy one involving those micro-capsule accommodation rooms for nurses and doctors, or at least they haven't refused any since we came back to Bristol, I don't know what happened back in the Eastville days. But you can't expect queues half way down Gloucester Rd of people desperate to stand on open terraces to watch the ball being hoofed from one keeper straight to the other with the end result being 0-0 Vs Burton Albion. People have other things to do with their precious time and money rather than stand on freezing concrete having paid a bit too much to watch a game which doesn't really look much like the football they see on the telly. This is why I'm so disappointed with Wael, I didn't expect multi-million pound signings, but he spoke calmly about evolution, 3 years down the line, the stadium is actually worse because of that embarrassing tent, which by the way lowers stadium capacity, the inertia he inherited has stalled and we are sliding back towards L2. |
|
Rex
Predictions League
Joined: June 2014
Posts: 3,287
|
Post by Rex on Jan 28, 2019 6:45:15 GMT
I always thought that there was always a fairly direct correlation between average home league attendances and average league position. So using attendance figures from 1921 and the Sky 50 year "ultimate league"... this is what I found. (Yes, I know it's two different time periods, but whatever)... I could only run the analysis over 89 Clubs. The 8 top best attended Clubs are also the top 8 sides in the ultimate league. The average variance over 89 Clubs in relation to average attendance/average position is 6.6 places. For the top 20 attended Clubs the average variance is 3.8 For the next 21-45 attended Clubs the average variance is 7.0 For the next 46-70 attended Clubs the average variance is 5.7 Below this the variance climbs as generally "poorly" attended Clubs tend to outperform. eg Shrewsbury +14: 80th by attendance, 66th by league record. The following 31 Clubs are exactly where they "should be", or within 3 or less places: Man Utd -2 Arsenal 0 Liverpool 2 Everton 0 Spurs 2 Man City 0 Chelsea 2 A Villa 1 Leeds -1 West Ham 2 Leicester 0 West Brom -1 M’borough 3 Derby -1 Stoke -1 Blackburn 3 Fulham -3 Charlton 3 sh*t -1 Hull -2 Reading 3 Notts Cty -1 The Gas -3 Wigan -3 Port Vale -1 Southend -1 Chesterfield -2 Mansfield 1 Exeter 0 York 1 Wycombe 0 The biggest "underperformers" in the top 3 divisions are: Wolves -13 Sheffield Weds -14 Birmingham -10 Cardiff -10 Preston -11 Plymouth -10 Doncaster -10 Northampton -10 The biggest "overperformers" in the top 3 divisions are: Southampton 13 Ipswich 12 QPR 17 Watford 12 Bournemouth 10 Conclusion. I thought that The Gas were "underperforming". We're not. We're where we "should" be. As are the sh*t. The data suggests that that the only way to gain a sustainable higher place in the pyramid is to increase the size of the average home gate. For that Bristol Rovers will need to build a new stadium, or to substantially redevelop the Memorial Stadium. No sh*t Shylock.Would you give up a pound of flesh for a new stadium  |
|
Rex
Predictions League
Joined: June 2014
Posts: 3,287
|
Post by Rex on Jan 28, 2019 6:50:48 GMT
I always thought that there was always a fairly direct correlation between average home league attendances and average league position. So using attendance figures from 1921 and the Sky 50 year "ultimate league"... this is what I found. (Yes, I know it's two different time periods, but whatever)... I could only run the analysis over 89 Clubs. The 8 top best attended Clubs are also the top 8 sides in the ultimate league. The average variance over 89 Clubs in relation to average attendance/average position is 6.6 places. For the top 20 attended Clubs the average variance is 3.8 For the next 21-45 attended Clubs the average variance is 7.0 For the next 46-70 attended Clubs the average variance is 5.7 Below this the variance climbs as generally "poorly" attended Clubs tend to outperform. eg Shrewsbury +14: 80th by attendance, 66th by league record. The following 31 Clubs are exactly where they "should be", or within 3 or less places: Man Utd -2 Arsenal 0 Liverpool 2 Everton 0 Spurs 2 Man City 0 Chelsea 2 A Villa 1 Leeds -1 West Ham 2 Leicester 0 West Brom -1 M’borough 3 Derby -1 Stoke -1 Blackburn 3 Fulham -3 Charlton 3 sh*t -1 Hull -2 Reading 3 Notts Cty -1 The Gas -3 Wigan -3 Port Vale -1 Southend -1 Chesterfield -2 Mansfield 1 Exeter 0 York 1 Wycombe 0 The biggest "underperformers" in the top 3 divisions are: Wolves -13 Sheffield Weds -14 Birmingham -10 Cardiff -10 Preston -11 Plymouth -10 Doncaster -10 Northampton -10 The biggest "overperformers" in the top 3 divisions are: Southampton 13 Ipswich 12 QPR 17 Watford 12 Bournemouth 10 Conclusion. I thought that The Gas were "underperforming". We're not. We're where we "should" be. As are the sh*t. The data suggests that that the only way to gain a sustainable higher place in the pyramid is to increase the size of the average home gate. For that Bristol Rovers will need to build a new stadium, or to substantially redevelop the Memorial Stadium. No sh*t Shylock. Wonder what happens when you dig a bit deeper and look at the number of supporters that clubs take to showpiece matches and also throw in how many clubs there are in each club's catchment area and look at how many other clubs share what population. I'll bet that we have more available local support than a club like Chelsea, just off the top of my head, they have QPR, Fulham and Brentford all within a 10 minute walk. What's the total population of all of the BS post codes, I think it's in excess of 1 million people, between 2 League clubs. We get, on a good day, 9000 people, out of our 50% of a million people. Not great, is it. The apologists for the pathetic way Rovers is managed often use as an excuse for poor recruitment the fact that other areas have multiple clubs in close proximity, so players can pursue a career without moving (complete twaddle of course, most players will kiss any badge as long as the length of contract and wage are sufficient) all this argument does is demonstrate that other clubs compete with us with fewer available supporters. It's a kind of 'Lazy journalism' to look at the headline figure of how many people turn up to watch a ball get kicked up in the air for 90 minutes and then us lose 1-0 to Wycombe Wanderers and then to say that the reason we are a rubbish 3rd tier team is because we don't get footfall. I would say that we don't get footfall because we make absolutely zero effort to market the product and because the experience and the stadium are rubbish. That's one thing I will agree with you on. I often hear Rovers fans saying how great our attendances are and in the same breath knocking teams like Yeovil for poor crowds, when the reality is that Yeovil and many others do far better than us at getting the locals to come to games. |
|
eppinggas
Administrator
Ian Alexander
Don't care
Joined: June 2014
Posts: 8,612
|
Post by eppinggas on Feb 4, 2019 11:25:59 GMT
You're not wrong Rex. I guess the problem we have is 'marketing' the Bristol Rovers 'experience' more effectively. Tough job in our current stadium. (In a weird kind of way I actually like the Mem BTW, but I'm in a minority. A new potential supporter/customer would 'probably' not be impressed).
Over to Tom Gorringe on how to get the average gates up. What promotions have we been running? Should we be targetting schools? Even giving away tickets for a nominal fee could add to the next generation of supporters.
Average gates of 8,023 this season - capacity effectively 12,000. (only 67%). Just fill some seats and we might get some money back in programmes, soft drinks etc.
There are plenty of other things for people to do on a Saturday afternoon in Bristol, so we have competition.
With all (well minimal actually) respect to Yeovil - there is f*ck all else to do there so you might as well go to football. UTG.
|
|
eppinggas
Administrator
Ian Alexander
Don't care
Joined: June 2014
Posts: 8,612
|
Post by eppinggas on Sept 21, 2022 16:44:52 GMT
|
|
