Author Topic: Attendance (Read 4117 times)

MathewsPateras · « **on:** September 30, 2011, 04:55:29 PM »

I think the public assistance to the stadiums should be greater....
Now I think so Top-level 20000, B category 15000, C 12000?

20000 in top-level is not realist. I think so is more realis the internationla macht assistance (70000-80000).

What do yo think about this?

Brian Clough · « **Reply #1 on:** September 30, 2011, 05:20:25 PM »

Quote from: MathewsPateras on September 30, 2011, 04:55:29 PM

20000 in top-level is not realist. I think so is more realis the internationla macht assistance (70000-80000).
What do yo think about this?

The way I understand it, 20,000 is the baseline for top leagues. This is completely realistic in top levels of smaller leagues, like Nigeria or even the USA. Even the English Premier league only averages about 35,000 attendees per match, and it is below 30,000 for Serie A or La Liga, though for the Bundesliga it's a little above 40,000. See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_attendance_figures_at_domestic_professional_sports_leagues for more info. I think you'll agree that the current numbers for attendance in GKO are actually perfect!

Drahcir · « **Reply #2 on:** September 30, 2011, 06:33:33 PM »

In Norway the average is around 10000 on "Top Level"

Etienne · « **Reply #3 on:** September 30, 2011, 07:16:42 PM »

my opinion : min attendance should be completely removed from game, attendance should be based 100 % on ranking, and ranking evolution should be based on league level. This is the most unbalanced point in this ( great though ) game.

Kr10s · « **Reply #4 on:** September 30, 2011, 09:08:29 PM »

Mmmmm it depends on every country and every team...... Talleres de Cordoba (Argentina) takes about 25.000 attendance every league match in Argentino A (Argentinian third division), a month ago played a friendly match against Velez Sarfield, attendance was 38.000.....

Boca Juniors has his stadium full every league match (about 50.000), there's no place for new associates, you've got to enter in a waiting list....
River Plate takes about 35.000 people in Primera B nacional (argentinian second division).

Take your conclussions.....

Etienne · « **Reply #5 on:** September 30, 2011, 10:42:45 PM »

that's not my point, these teams doesnt need min attendance rule to get 20k people in stadium.
My point was, between 2 new teams, one in top league, and the other one in league D or lower, there is a huge difference in term of income and that's not fair at all.

Kr10s · « **Reply #6 on:** September 30, 2011, 10:56:06 PM »

Quote from: Etienne on September 30, 2011, 10:42:45 PM

that's not my point, these teams doesnt need min attendance rule to get 20k people in stadium.
My point was, between 2 new teams, one in top league, and the other one in league D or lower, there is a huge difference in term of income and that's not fair at all.

I get i now, you're right.
Also i believe EVERY level should have a minimum attendance rule. And maybe attendance should increase not only depending on team rating, maybe it should depend when your club got established too, we'd compensate those clubs playing in most active countries, but with their clubs placed lower division, what do you think?

Brian Clough · « **Reply #7 on:** October 01, 2011, 12:36:52 AM »

Yes, good points, CarlosT

Also, maybe the minimum attendance should be somewhat depressed for the first 2-3 seasons, particularly for teams that start in upper levels (small league). A team starting at the 1st or second level should not get the full 15000 or 20000 min. attend., respectively, but should get 50%, 67%, and 83% of the min attendance for their level for seasons 1 through 3, respectively. So a team that started in the 3rd level would get a 6000 min attend. for the first season (50% of 12000 = 6000). Say the team makes it to the second level for the 2nd season; they would have a 10000 min. attend (67% of 15000 = 10000). Then the team makes it to the top level for the 3rd season; they then get 16667 min. attend. Only in the 4th season would the min. attend. reach 100% of the current levels.

gabrielis · « **Reply #8 on:** October 01, 2011, 12:24:27 PM »

Quote from: Champione on October 01, 2011, 12:36:52 AM

Yes, good points, CarlosT

Also, maybe the minimum attendance should be somewhat depressed for the first 2-3 seasons, particularly for teams that start in upper levels (small league). A team starting at the 1st or second level should not get the full 15000 or 20000 min. attend., respectively, but should get 50%, 67%, and 83% of the min attendance for their level for seasons 1 through 3, respectively. So a team that started in the 3rd level would get a 6000 min attend. for the first season (50% of 12000 = 6000). Say the team makes it to the second level for the 2nd season; they would have a 10000 min. attend (67% of 15000 = 10000). Then the team makes it to the top level for the 3rd season; they then get 16667 min. attend. Only in the 4th season would the min. attend. reach 100% of the current levels.

why you want to lower att?

Brian Clough · « **Reply #9 on:** October 01, 2011, 01:08:12 PM »

Just to give everyone a fairer start for the first few seasons; teams who start in an upper level (small league) get a lot more attendance than they probably deserve...at least for the first few seasons, while the team is "building its fan base", so to speak.

Kr10s · « **Reply #10 on:** October 01, 2011, 01:18:44 PM »

I believe minimum attendance should be grantd in all division, higher division club should get higher attendance than they currently do, but with some time, just to keep fairness to older players.

Gabrielis, think in this way: you've been here long time ago, but you still don't have enough club rating to take more than 20.000 people in home matches.... if somebody new joins the game and suddenly appears in Lithuanian's Top Division, do you believe its fair he get the same atttendance you do? Think in a newbie placed in B division, about to be promoted, soon he'll receive same attendance than you do......

I think about a couple newbies joined argentinian league, some of them placed in top 3 in C Division, they already have 12.000 minimum attendance and, if they make things right, they'll have 15.000 in less than a month, is there any fairness with managers playing 6 or 7 months ago in lower division? I can't take 11.000 people yet (i got promoted, will have 12.000 next season), where's fairness in any newbie getting higher minimum attendance from the start?

gabrielis · « **Reply #11 on:** October 01, 2011, 01:21:27 PM »

Quote from: Champione on October 01, 2011, 01:08:12 PM

Just to give everyone a fairer start for the first few seasons; teams who start in an upper level (small league) get a lot more attendance than they probably deserve...at least for the first few seasons, while the team is "building its fan base", so to speak.

fairer start?you are the one who have suggested to give less money to smallest leagues and now you're talking about fairness?

Brian Clough · « **Reply #12 on:** October 01, 2011, 01:56:45 PM »

Quote from: gabrielis on October 01, 2011, 01:21:27 PM

Quote from: Champione on October 01, 2011, 01:08:12 PM
Just to give everyone a fairer start for the first few seasons; teams who start in an upper level (small league) get a lot more attendance than they probably deserve...at least for the first few seasons, while the team is "building its fan base", so to speak.

fairer start?you are the one who have suggested to give less money to smallest leagues and now you're talking about fairness?

Maybe you forgot, but I ONLY suggested this as a way to remove the incentive for new players from big leagues to illegally join smaller ones, since this isn't determined by ip. YOU ALSO MAY REMEMBER THAT I MUCH PREFERRED locking users' league by ip rather than lowering prize money. This is all easily justifiable in the interest of fairness, anyway.

So YOU think it's fair that a new club (in Lithuania, for example) gets to have 12000 min. attendance in their first season while clubs in Argentina, England, Brazil, etc. only get a small number based only on their club ranking (which is sure to be dismal at first)? And you question MY devotion to fairness?

Edit: removed extra smileys