Jump to content
  • Welcome!

    Register and log in easily with Twitter or Google accounts!

    Or simply create a new Huddle account. 

    Members receive fewer ads , access our dark theme, and the ability to join the discussion!

     

"Best Fanbases" - Whoops. Repost


Recommended Posts

https://sports.yahoo.com/cowboys-patriots-fans-are-best-in-the-nfl-chiefs-los-angeles-lagging-study-153035364.html

 

Notables:

Cowboys 1, Saints 10, Falcons 13, Buccaneers 23, Panthers 16, Chiefs 31, Rams 32

Key points:

 

Quote

 

Fan Equity is a matter of judging how well fans support their team by backing up their words with dollars — i.e., how much they spend on everything from season tickets to jerseys. If a team fills its stadium but there’s not much demand past that, their Fan Equity score is lower.

Social Equity is based on a team’s social media reach — i.e., how many followers the team has across various social media channels. A team that’s not able to draw many followers on social isn’t a team with a deep degree of Social Equity.

Road Equity involves measuring how well a team draws on the road, adjusting for team performance. People show up to watch when the Cowboys or Steelers come to town. People don’t show up to watch when, say, the Bengals or Titans do. (Sorry, Cincy and Tennessee, but you know it’s true.)

 

Panthers were 22 for Fan Equity, 5 for Social Equity, 27 for Road Equity.

 

Edit : Whoops, didn't see it.  Looked for it.  But apparently I am blind in the morning.  Feel free to funnel your replies to 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Our fan base is trash outside of a VERY small group. I'd put us somewhere between 21-28. The bottom 4 being Rams, Jaguars, Chargers & Cardinals. Back to back winnings seasons will help us improve. But have virtually 0 road presence outside of RR for away games. Even our home games are shameful.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

24 minutes ago, Dex said:

Our fan base is trash outside of a VERY small group. I'd put us somewhere between 21-28. The bottom 4 being Rams, Jaguars, Chargers & Cardinals. Back to back winnings seasons will help us improve. But have virtually 0 road presence outside of RR for away games. Even our home games are shameful.

NC has traditionally always struggled with consistent professional sports support. The (real) Hornets, Hurricanes and Panthers have all had extremely high levels of support when they were winning. However, when that starts to slide, the support has traditionally declined with it. That is largely the case with just about any team, obviously, but it does seem more pronounced in areas like ours where there is not a long history of professional athletics.

Only one way to cure it, win, win and win some more. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

41 minutes ago, Dex said:

Our fan base is trash outside of a VERY small group. I'd put us somewhere between 21-28. The bottom 4 being Rams, Jaguars, Chargers & Cardinals. Back to back winnings seasons will help us improve. But have virtually 0 road presence outside of RR for away games. Even our home games are shameful.

I was at the game against the Giants last year, and it was legitimately 50-50 in the stands.  I've been to (I think) 14 games since 2001 and used to always balk at the notion of a true split from a visiting fanbase like that, but it really looked like it to me that day.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

51 minutes ago, Dex said:

Our fan base is trash outside of a VERY small group. I'd put us somewhere between 21-28. The bottom 4 being Rams, Jaguars, Chargers & Cardinals. Back to back winnings seasons will help us improve. But have virtually 0 road presence outside of RR for away games. Even our home games are shameful.

We're still a new team. We've only have one generation of adult fans who had the chance to grow up following the Panthers as their football team. I was in college by the time the team got to Charlotte, and many of my friends were already Redskins fans by then. Also, fug the Redskins. We need another 20 years before we start to approach the upper middle pack of fandoms. It's all about time and getting people to buy in. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.


  • PMH4OWPW7JD2TDGWZKTOYL2T3E.jpg

  • Topics

  • Posts

    • Congratulations do they know who the father is?
    • In my opinion Fitterer was probably right about not paying McCaffrey. Now not wanting to "pay RBs" in my opinion isn't something you want to set in stone, to me it all comes down to the individual.
    • Maybe I'm just not understanding, but everywhere that I have read says that signing bonuses go against the cap prorated by as much as five years. The following example uses Andrew Luck's rookie contract as an example. "Take Andrew Luck, the first overall pick in the 2012 NFL draft. Luck signed a four-year contract with the Colts worth $22.1 million and included a $14.5 million signing bonus. Rather than a $14.5 million cap hit in 2012, the Colts spread out his signing bonus over the life of his contract. The hit against the cap would be $3.625 million per year over four years instead of a direct cap hit of $14.5 million directly in 2012. This gave the Colts more leverage and cap flexibility in signing other players." https://www.the33rdteam.com/nfl-signing-bonuses-explained/ I don't know why some of you think that signing bonuses aren't counted against the cap over the length of the contract, but whatever.   "The bonus with a signing is usually the most garish aspect of a rookie contract. Bonus is the immediate cash players receive when they ink a deal. It factors into the cap, but only for the whole contract duration, in terms of salary cap calculations. In the case of Bryce Young’s $24.6 million signing bonus, that’s prorated to approximately $6.15 million per season over a four-year deal. This format allows teams to handle the cap and provides rookies with some short-term fiscal stability, which is important given the high injury risk in this league." https://collegefootballnetwork.com/how-rookie-contracts-work-in-the-nfl/ I understand how signing bonuses can be a useful tool in order to manage the cap, and as one of the article suggests, signing bonuses may become important if you have a tight cap, but the bill is always going to come due. I'm not necessarily referring to you Tuka, but it seems to me that others simply don't want to understand that fact which is why they're reacting to what I'm saying negatively. How odd. In any event, I have a better general understanding of why signing bonuses are used now, and it's generally to fit salaries under the cap. Surely players, whether they be rookies or not, love a signing bonus because they get a good portion of their money up front. This in turn gives them more security and probably amounts to tax benefits as well. I also understand why teams would not want to use signing bonuses, particularly for players or draftees who have a higher probability of being gone before a contract even ends.
×
×
  • Create New...