@ Eldar

I think so.

I’m not sure what more SFC could do to get you to go to more games ... it sounds like release a few players, sign some average ones, and become more competitive with everyone else?

Any it wasn’t aimed negatively at you by the way, I don’t know your circumstances, but it’s a familiar problem for clubs like SFC - not enough core fans that will go no matter the weather, the day, the kick off time, the opponent!

If Brisbane could get everyone that goes to a home game each season to go to just one more game each, the average would jump to 17,500 .... instead FB is full of reasons why people can’t go.

Sydney sports fans in a nutshell. A more pathetic attitude you will not find.

If I lived closer I probably would and I did when I was.

I just don't feel the necessity to go to every game when I have shelled out $1300 a year for Foxtel so I can watch it in the comfort of my home.

If I have friends who are keen to go I'll go or if I feel like the game is going to make a good day out I will go. After last night I feel more inclined to go again. 

I don't know what more you want from.

I certainly admire you but I'm not sure Brisbane should be rewarded for serving up such shit, and I don't mean they need to be winning all the time, I just mean recruiting well and providing some quality, dido for many other teams.

You know what the difference between BBL and A-League is? If you go to the BBL you are guaranteed slogging, audience happy. If you go to the A-League you aren't guaranteed quality football or even shots on goal.

I bet the ewoks managed to get your arse off the couch, so that just leaves 1 other

I have no fucking idea what you are talking about but I am sure it is witty.

Play against teams that are desperate for points ?

@ Eldar

That sums up the difference between football and entertainment.

Football is football and often it turns out entertaining, but not always.

BBL is not cricket it’s entertainment.

Some people will like both, most will pick one over the other.

The FFA have been chasing AFL, NRL, BBL and “families” for years instead of letting football be football

And obviously good enough (and well coached enough) to have a chance of beating them?

I support the game through Foxtel subscription(it's biggest source of income), club membership, attending half a dozen games a season and bringing friends.

If more people did this we would be better off.

Nope

FTFY

I don't think "families" and "entertainment" are necessarily one and the same. Plenty of families are made up of hardcore fans, thats one of the ways to create rusted on support for the future: going to the game with dad etc. 

@ Sydneyfc

Agree totally. I was using “families” in the unusual sense that is the ffa targeting some generic, almost mythical family unit looking for sanitised entertainment. If they do exist they’re already at the BBL or Basketball

Families are naturally attracted to football for the reasons you mention, and more, but in the pursuit of everyone else the ffa has been killing off its core football support.

Bitter fucking Zealots, Victory fans in a nutshell.

Fucking 25 000 members and 15 000 to a game, must be a lot of Sydney members at Victory.

No doubt about it - Sydneysiders are the world champions at staying at home and watching stuff on telly.

Yeah and Melbournians go to AFL games, with all due respect I'd rather do other shit.

Yeah. Like watch telly at home. We get it.

Whatever mate,

At least they go out. 

Could we just get Fox to Augment Fans in the ground

Everyone watch it on Telly

Wouldn't even need any of these new Stadiums, Security, Public transport

There really isn't a point to attacking one individual for his preferences.

Yeah they go to the AFL, more people go to Football in Sydney than in Melbourne.

Riding on the coattails of AFL attendees is embarrassing.

You can compare it with every sport. 

AFL, NRL, Cricket, and even football. Cry harder, but the fact remains you're shit. Don't pretend you had something else on because your state shuts at 8. 

Like I said...embarrassing.

Your making an assumption yet to be proved true, and that assumption is that there are enough hard core fans upon which to build the football model people of FFT say they want.  An expanded comp, with a second division and Pro/Rel, and no salary cap.  This is how its done in Europe right? and it works there.  Smaller clubs survive on a trickle down approach from the mega rich clubs, with a never ending spiral in player salaries.  So the question is, is a purist model going to generate sufficient funds to allow something like this model to work in Australia?  My suspicion is that the FFA have crunched the numbers and decided it will not.  I do not know if they are right or not, but its pretty clearly what they think.
There would be some irony if the FFAs hated families first approach (which has not worked clearly), and pitch for the derided `sports fan`, was an attempt to generate the supporter base required to support the football model, purists want.
I

@ jatz

Yup, I’m prepared to accept there’s some assumptions in there. And I don’t have the answers but I’m also sure the ffa don’t either. That’s why the broadening of the Congress is important - no one group or person can have all the answers

Entirely incorrect

The FFA have started with an AFL model and that's the path they want to go down. 5 years ago the FFA had a $17m a year TV deal to sustain it (and all other parts of the game), and during the latest negotiations they said they hoped for $80m a year and it wont be enough for expansion

When the FFA started Lowy said "give me $15m and I will run football". And that's all that's required. The fact of it is the league can be run with $1 if the clubs picked up all the other costs. And (hypothetically) why couldn't they when they each have their own regions, commercial opportunities, fan bases, owners, investors etc...

The risk of that of course is if a club went bust we lose games each week and possibly breach our TV deal. So the FFA need to mitigate this by a handout to clubs that represents the minimal costs of running a club so no damage if a club folds - even with crowds of zero. We achieved this milestone when clubs received a $2.5m handout in the previous TV deal

But now clubs are asking for six fucking million dollars. And the administration costs of the league are seven fucking million (despite being $2m in other countries). You cant honestly tell me the FFA have done cost modeling and concluded that the league that costs $80m to sustain in its current format is the best way forward

The "demon" 2 tier structure of blindly copying Europe to help sustain erections (which just happens to be in every other country except USA and Australia) is the most cost efficient model. It takes the cost burden off the central body and puts it on the clubs, and rewards those who invest the most and bring the most revenue to the game. There is a definite filter down effect as we see in Germany where the top 5 clubs get a bigger portion of the revenue because they are attracting the most interest and generating the most income

There is a reason why Malaysia even has P/R and why countries that don't have a $50m TV deal and $100m in annual revenue can achieve it also

People who follow the AFL model don't understand P/R. To them it means a franchise of the current size and structure in a second tier, paid for by attendances. They don't understand the trickle down effect even though it is clearly evident in the current system

It is undeniable the big 4-5 clubs in Australia will drive the league to new heights and generate much more interest and revenue. The cost burden on the league would be a hell of a lot less and clubs at the foot of the table wont be looking for $6m to run a club. The FFA have done little in terms of number crunching. They brought the answer from the AFL / NRL and have spent the last few years trying to cram this square peg in the round hole

11,189 at Suncorp.  as per Daily Telegraph.

Perth v Adelaide - 9069 (HAL website)

Melbourne v CCM 8,370 
SOURCE: Ultimate a league.