2023 Crowds and TV/Streaming

[Teen Wolf]

Do you agree that a W player that can't bounce the ball or kick a drop punt should be earning more than a VFL player?

The VFL salary cap is $220,000, for 40 players, at about 5k per player. W players earn over 40k on average for half the season length, moving to 80k in 2027.

Minimum salary for AFLW players this year is $51,290. So the average is much higher than 40k, you've made a mistake there.

Footballers make mistakes on occasion too, and somebody who twists that into "the players can't bounce the ball and can't kick a drop punt" is not worth taking seriously.

 

[Bjo187]

The AFLW is going to gobble up the talent. 82K average salary for 540 players is bigger than anything else on the planet.

Gobble up talent = every improving league = ever improving revenues

And gobble up the AFL's financial advantage over the NRL.

33 Irish women that have never played the game are earning nearly 10x the amount of footballers that have been toiling away their whole life to make it into the vfl. People that can actually pick up the ball, bounce the ball and kick, with lower paid coaching.

 

[Consolaçao]

And gobble up the AFL's financial advantage over the NRL.

33 Irish women that have never played the game are earning nearly 10x the amount of footballers that have been toiling away their whole life to make it into the vfl. People that can actually pick up the ball, bounce the ball and kick, with lower paid coaching.

Based on skill level, nobody would argue AFLW salaries are justified. That's not really the point though, there are very good strategic reasons for paying women overs at this stage of the AFLW's evolution.

Having hundreds of thousands of women playing the game is a massive, massive boost for the sport. Besides the benefits for the women playing (which is self-evident), there are also big benefits for the men's game.

• More government funding for AR infrastructure
• More future mothers with links to the game encouraging their kids into the game
• The moderating influence of bringing women into male-dominated community organisations

 

[The Educator]

And gobble up the AFL's financial advantage over the NRL.

33 Irish women that have never played the game are earning nearly 10x the amount of footballers that have been toiling away their whole life to make it into the vfl. People that can actually pick up the ball, bounce the ball and kick, with lower paid coaching.

The investment in the AFLW is precisely leveraging the financial advantage the AFL has over the NRL.

Comparing the AFLW to the men's second tier is riduculous

 

[Mick 77]

Minimum salary for AFLW players this year is $51,290. So the average is much higher than 40k, you've made a mistake there.

Footballers make mistakes on occasion too, and somebody who twists that into "the players can't bounce the ball and can't kick a drop punt" is not worth taking seriously.

Didn’t the minimum wage jump to $60000 for this year effective immediately once EBA was signed?

 

[weewilly]

"Footballers make mistakes on occasion too, and somebody who twists that into "the players can't bounce the ball and can't kick a drop punt" is not worth taking seriously."

The women make ten times the stupid mistakes that the AFL men do and even for an Australian Football supporter me like it is a hard watch and I doubt that the AFLW will ever get anywhere the standard of Mens footy.

It is what it is and the crowds now reflect that and I suspect now that the novelty factor has worn off that they will stay that way for the foreseeable future.

BTW none of the other local Womens football codes get very big crowds either.

 

[Bjo187]

Based on skill level, nobody would argue AFLW salaries are justified. That's not really the point though, there are very good strategic reasons for paying women overs at this stage of the AFLW's evolution.

Having hundreds of thousands of women playing the game is a massive, massive boost for the sport. Besides the benefits for the women playing (which is self-evident), there are also big benefits for the men's game.

• More government funding for AR infrastructure
• More future mothers with links to the game encouraging their kids into the game
• The moderating influence of bringing women into male-dominated community organisations

My argument is those things would have happened anyway. 90 percent of female footballers would still play the game regardless of the over inflated salaries. Heck, even if you went down the local footy club and asked all the girls there how much aflw players earn, they'd have no idea. Similar to the fact soccer and basketball are still the most played sports in Australia and their players only earn just over 100k, compared to afl and nrl over 400k average.

Kids play the sport they wanna play and 40k for a 10 week season is more than enough without these additional ridiculous pay rises.

In particular with aflw, the appeal is playing the most popular sport in the country, access to great facilities, status among peers, every game being on tv throughout the country, the money is a bonus most wouldn't even think about when they get involved.

Instead of the extra tens of millions of dollars being flung at people that can't even kick a ball properly, it could be allocated to better promotion of gc and gws in the northern states. Helping gws create an academy in western sydney that head hunt's athletes from other sports there and actual significant resources into developing footballers from multicultural backgrounds into the AFL. You could even have an AFL reserves comp if the W money wasn't being flushed down the drain.

You'd still have 90 percent the same result with women playing the game, but an extra 30 mill per year into developing the game in areas that are vital to the AFL's long term future, I know which option I'd prefer.

 

[Bjo187]

The tv ratings for the draft are only around the 80k mark on Foxtel. Is this extremely low? I thought it would be an event as popular as a mid level type game.

 

[RussellEbertHandball]

The tv ratings for the draft are only around the 80k mark on Foxtel. Is this extremely low? I thought it would be an event as popular as a mid level type game.

Nah too much hyperbolic bullsh*t and time wasting to attract big numbers.

Plus the media effectively tells you who is going where for the first round for a month.

Cal Twomey working for AFL gets info from clubs and the AFL website have their own coverage with Twomey and Beveridge who have a lot better knowledge than the Fox Footy guys. Just have to put up with Nat Edwards' girlie attempt at humour.

 

[BobbyMorri]

plus, it would only be of interest to the diehards.

Average Joe(and some diehards) don't celebrate drafts. You get who you get and you find out next year if they are any good.

 

[BallaratBulldog]

plus, it would only be of interest to the diehards.

Average Joe(and some diehards) don't celebrate drafts. You get who you get and you find out next year if they are any good.

Next year? Your a quick judge!

 

[BobbyMorri]

Next year? Your a quick judge!

I think I am fairly slow. Most only give them 3 rounds and judge it on Fantasy points.

 

[Rob]

The tv ratings for the draft are only around the 80k mark on Foxtel. Is this extremely low? I thought it would be an event as popular as a mid level type game.

Why? Nobody has seen these kids play.

It's not like the drafts in the US where they've been playing in college. As much as the AFL would like it to be.

 

[Bjo187]

Why? Nobody has seen these kids play.

It's not like the drafts in the US where they've been playing in college. As much as the AFL would like it to be.

Access to player highlights is ridiculous these days. How hard is it to type into YouTube a players name and watch a 4 min clip of their highlights. Each of the top 30 have about 3 different videos on them now too.

 

[BobbyMorri]

Access to player highlights is ridiculous these days. How hard is it to type into YouTube a players name and watch a 4 min clip of their highlights. Each of the top 30 have about 3 different videos on them now too.

I could make highlights of Ed Barlow's career and make it seem like was a top, top player. Highlights don't mean anything.

I will compare it to the NBA here. Not fair, as one superstar in the NBA/Basketball can turn a team around and are more impactful, unlike the AFL/Aussie Rules. But whatever.

NBA draft has a lottery, it has draft rankings for 2-3 years from early high school. It has March Madness. These "kids" are normally over 20 and have developed most of their game.

Our kids are raw 18 year olds playing in front of hundreds of people each week, all around Australia. It just doesn't compare.

On top of that, only the diehards would bother even looking at the highlights. Diehard are only a small fraction of the support of any sport.

 

[weewilly]

The tv ratings for the draft are only around the 80k mark on Foxtel. Is this extremely low? I thought it would be an event as popular as a mid level type game.

The Afl would be happy with those figures for a show that is

The tv ratings for the draft are only around the 80k mark on Foxtel. Is this extremely low? I thought it would be an event as popular as a mid level type game.

The AFL would be happy with those figures for a pretty boring show unless you are an AFL fanatic!

Mon # 2 on Foxtel behind the Australian WCC run chase!

Last Night 50,000 almost double of the WBBL on only 26,000.

 

[Bjo187]

The Afl would be happy with those figures for a show that is

The AFL would be happy with those figures for a pretty boring show unless you are an AFL fanatic!

Mon # 2 on Foxtel behind the Australian WCC run chase!

Last Night 50,000 almost double of the WBBL on only 26,000.

I get all that. I love the draft but I look into all the talent etc. I'm still surprised it isn't higher, mind you the AFL could do the event a lot better too, but maybe the motivation isn't there if ratings are low.

 

[lanson15]

I get all that. I love the draft but I look into all the talent etc. I'm still surprised it isn't higher, mind you the AFL could do the event a lot better too, but maybe the motivation isn't there if ratings are low.

I don’t think more promotion would help. Anecdotal, but all of my friends and colleagues who follow the sport during the footy season completely switch off from all content the day after the Grand final. Then they don’t come back until the end of pre season

 

[Bjo187]

I don’t think more promotion would help. Anecdotal, but all of my friends and colleagues who follow the sport during the footy season completely switch off from all content the day after the Grand final. Then they don’t come back until the end of pre season

Actually you're right, chatting to my friends practically none of them watched it.

I misread the room on this one, I thought because I love it, all other footy followers with a medium level interest and above would be into it too.

 

[kranger]

AFLW average crowds for the home and away season.

On the left, the original 8 AFLW clubs, on the right, the 10 expansion clubs.
View attachment 1860050


Covid and the introduction of entry fees to games in 2021 had a significant decline impact on crowd. However there is a lot less fluctuation in crowd sizes since then.

View attachment 1860053


There are quite a few factors that make individual teams crowds fluctuate each year. Including playing games out of their home town, or one off spectacles such as the first showdown, or first football game at Optus Stadium, or a double header with the AFLM, which I’ve excluded in this second graph series.
View attachment 1860052


But overall, in the last season, there is a general upwards movement in attendances for any team more than 2 seasons old (except for GWS and Eagles).
View attachment 1860051

 

[weewilly]

The crowd of just under 5000 in Brisbane for the AFLW PF looked good and about what you would expect!

The WBBL game at the MCG on Saturday night drew a crowd of 5933 and with such a poor turn up I doubt CA will waste money on any MCG matches in the future.

 

[dave10]

The crowd of just under 5000 in Brisbane for the AFLW PF looked good and about what you would expect!

The WBBL game at the MCG on Saturday night drew a crowd of 5933 and with such a poor turn up I doubt CA will waste money on any MCG matches in the future.

Yeah, that WBBL crowd was a shocker. It had decent PR too do I think all would be a bit let down by it.

 

[Teagueeee15]

Yeah, that WBBL crowd was a shocker. It had decent PR too do I think all would be a bit let down by it.

It was - for context the forecast was possible thunderstorm and up to 10mm rain, so that would have put families off from attending.

 

[weewilly]

It was - for context the forecast was possible thunderstorm and up to 10mm rain, so that would have put families off from attending.

Even it the crowd at the G doubled if it was fine it would still be a shocker!

Anything under 20,000 at the MCG would be a loss maker.

 

[Bjo187]

I was discussing with a mate the other day how it's interesting women's cricket exists and the standard is ok. Neither of us had ever met a female in our lives that likes or plays cricket. Maybe because it was one of the first women's sports, I dunno, but an interesting observation all the same.