What's the definition of a "good crowd"?

I've got the average crowds here: http://www.aleaguestats.com/ALeagueStats_35FFACupCrowds.html

Bearing in mind that the FFA cup is a bit of a novelty for teams to compete in (as in: you'd expect them to get a larger crowd for an FFA cup match than the week-in, week-out league fixtures), the crowds aren't that great. Especially if you look at the averages excluding matches where their opposition was an A-League side, in that case the best average is for Devenport City, with an average of 2793 over 2 matches.
Everyone was thrilled by Heidleberg pulling 11k when they hosted Melbourne City, but excluding A-League opposition they only average 1.5K for FFA cup matches.
Even South Melbourne only averaged 1780 over the 2 matches they've hosted against state league opponents.

Welcome to a franchise football league Australia.   Pay big to play big.  

Do you think the A Leagues club will ever allow the likes of a second division club to be in the same league as them if they have had to pay the 6 or 7 figure franchise fee & the second division team hasn't paid shit?  Yer 'aving a fucking larf lad.   

The A-League clubs shouldn't be making the decision.  The FFA being the body with the responsibility to control and grow the game in Australia should be deciding the who, how and when of P/R.

And good luck with that now that club interests are running the FFA, eh nuvo new dawners? 

Clearly a face in the slap of the new new dawners.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
(Did I get that right?)

Yeh, makes sense to me that there is almost zero chance of a little team being allowed into the top tier at the expense of a club which has paid millions for a license.

There's another thread floating around about whether a newly promoted team should be paying some sort of license fee.  I don't know the answer, but it seems pretty obvious to me that once the clubs take over, there's no way known they'll let anyone in for nothing.

Don’t the newly promoted teams in the EPL actually get a promotion bonus rather than having to pay a fee?

Yes.

But don't let that get in the way of people still thinking that there is going to be an entrance fee to the 1st division.

This is straya mate, we are special, no place for unproven Euro snob practices here!

There won’t be an “entrance fee” to get in to the top flight.

FIFA wouldn’t permit it, it would fly in the face of their “clubs and players must find their level on merit alone” stance. In fact I’d say “paying to play” in the top flight is exactly why they had that introduced in the first place - to stop administrators milking the system.

They only got away with it with Uncle Frank because he persuaded them that professional football never really existed and what remnants there are were dead anyway. The Lowys inability to move from their big-bash franchise model to the fifa model was basically the cause of their downfall last year.

The need now is a viable second division, even a semi-pro one, that will act as a catalyst for pro/rel ... as long as all we have is the NPL FIFA will just accept we have one professional division and the rest is mainly amateur.

A middle ground could be the newly promoted clubs pay for the license with their first year broadcasting revenue. Can see clubs yo-yo back down but if it's only the first year, a club could take a punt or if they bounce back in year 3, they would have already paid for a license and don't need a new one. 

But  that's precisely what the MLS does, it's a pay to play system.

otherwise known as a slice of a mega broadcast deal
they've had four professional divisions forever, our starting point is 10 professional teams, and the most recent additions have paid large license fees

@bettega

“But that's precisely what the MLS does, it's a pay to play system”

MLS don’t have pro/rel though, they sell franchise rights.

Their defence has been similar to the FFAs in that there wasn’t an organised and stable second tier to accomodate pro/rel (and until recently the two divisions below MLS couldn’t even agree which one was Div 2 and which Div 3).

It’s only this last season that their Div 2/3 has taken shape, I’ve no idea how stable they are yet though.

But FIFA are watching and their is a domestic (US) campaign for pro/rel and the 100 clubs below MLS increased pressure and day they’re prepared to go to court:

https://www.sportbusiness.com/news/over-100-clubs-write-to-us-soccer-calling-for-promotion-and-relegation/

Once pro/rel comes in teams don’t need to pay a fee to get promoted. FIFA won’t allow that, the selling of franchises is just a different model - Australia has 9 professional clubs, the rest are amateur, FIFA only insists on pro/rel between closely related tiers not from professional game to amateur game.

Australia has no pyramid and that’s why we don’t have pro/rel. the same argument applies in the USA but is an argument that’s being lost once a second division was turned.

"MLS don’t have pro/rel though, they sell franchise rights."

That's why I'm mentioning the MLS.  Many view the MLS as the model for us.  And for the moment, our model looks like it's all about selling franchise rights, exactly like the MLS.

yeh, we think we are better than the Eurosnobs!

But in Europe they look upon Oz and think we are all bunch of inbred hillbillies who shower once per week whether we need it or not.

The pro/rel push for US is far bigger than here and in fact their issues with the MLS are worse so you could be right.

Crowds down
TV numbers down

Every metric they need to survive with their expensive franchise model is crumbling. 

Mls has about as much relevance to mainstream America as Lacrosse, it’s basically considered a regional league. Such a waste of potential as pro/rel would serve every American market and offer something that not even the other US sports can. For every Atlanta, Seattle etc you have Chicago and New England playing in empty stadiums..2 pretty big markets. They have botched it.

Rather have a nation with a spread of sports and being regarded as one of the greatest sporting nations than being a one trick pony with all the eggs in one basket.

Most Euro nations are a shambles economically but hey, lets just follow their kulcha no questions asked.

Do they produce better football players/teams than us yes or no?

lol!!

You're about 8 years late to that party

By what metric lmao. We excel in sports that predominately British dominion countries play (such as cricket, union) or that no one gives a shit about (league, AFL). We've also fallen behind in the Olympics as other countries get wealthier and get their act together. 

Probably our best performing (relevant) national team is the Boomers.

Football is the true test of sporting greatness, given that almost all countries in the world compete. 

I can’t believe people are criticising the MLS crowds, here’s the averages:

Atlanta 53,002
Seattle Sounders FC 40,641
Toronto FC   26,628
LA Galaxy   24,444
Minnesota United FC   23,902
Orlando City SC   23,866
New York City FC   23,211
Los Angeles FC   22,042
Vancouver Whitecaps FC   21,946
Portland Timbers   21,144
Sporting Kansas City   19,950
San Jose Earthquakes   19,032
Real Salt Lake   18,605
New York Red Bulls   18,601
Montreal Impact   18,569   
New England Revolution   18,347
D.C. United   17,635
Houston Dynamo   16,906
Philadelphia Union   16,518
FC Dallas   15,512
Colorado Rapids   15,300
Chicago Fire   14,806   (17k capacity)
Columbus Crew   12,447

https://www.latimes.com/sports/soccer/la-sp-soccer-baxter-20161029-story.html
But none of the top North American leagues use an old-school turnstile count, meaning none of the attendance figures they release reflect the number of people who actually attend the events.

https://www.theguardian.com/football/2017/sep/28/football-clubs-leagues-attendance-figures-arsenal-celtic-mls

https://twitter.com/EmptySeatsPics

Just some examples

Right, so we’re saying the reported numbers are incorrect.

Then there’s no discussion.

People can say what they like - the numbers are lower or even higher and we’re supposed to debate that??

NSL has an average crowd of less than 600 .... apparently.

HAL apparently is 15k this year ... they’re just under reporting for tax reasons.

Those windows aren't going to lick themselves 

Please explain.

We're not Europe. They don't have franchise competitions. Do you really think that the incompetent dopes of the FFA are really going to allow a 2nd Division Team to parachute into the top flight without significant recompense to themselves or more than likely make it as difficult as possible by imposing untenable conditions of entry.   Grow up.   

Not sure if this has been posted elsewhere but this seems as good a place as any for it. Interesting take on the issue but I have to admit he lost me at 'W-league - Tier 2'

The timeline is probably still too long for some but some of the ideas have merit.

https://theworldgame.sbs.com.au/the-bold-plan-to-transform-australian-football-by-2029

Attendances look very good until you note the population of those cities and realise that the proportion going to games isn't that different to here.

Atlanta are getting 50k plus, still in their honeymoon novelty phase (remember when Victory were getting 40k plus to games?) - from a metro population of over 5 million.
LA Galaxy and Los Angeles FC meanwhile, are getting under 50k combined from a metro population of 13 million.