Browns Fans Rated Second to Last?
-
I am always realistic in my view of the team, it's record, the coaches and ownership. I understand where they are in the hierarchy of successful NFL teams. And although this study seems to be based on real data, for some reason I don't believe it.
https://scholarblogs.emory.edu/esma/2015/07/08/2015-nfl-fan-equity-rankings/
-
I am always realistic in my view of the team, it's record, the coaches and ownership. I understand where they are in the hierarchy of successful NFL teams. And although this study seems to be based on real data, for some reason I don't believe it.
https://scholarblogs.emory.edu/esma/2015/07/08/2015-nfl-fan-equity-rankings/
The Soldier said:
I am always realistic in my view of the team, it's record, the coaches and ownership. I understand where they are in the hierarchy of successful NFL teams. And although this study seems to be based on real data, for some reason I don't believe it.
https://scholarblogs.emory.edu/esma/2015/07/08/2015-nfl-fan-equity-rankings/
Again and again and again, these assholes do NOT measure the passion of a fan base when they rank here.....they are measuring above all the performance of the team. This article is full of ignorance.
Now, if by "Fan Equity" they mean: how well is a truly loyal fan base being rewarded by the success of the team over the years.....then the Browns very well may be at the lower end of things. In terms of on field success the Browns organization has shit all over the loyal fans, no doubt
But somehow I do not think that is what this article is supposedly trying to measure....which makes it fucking stupid.
-
we use fifteen years of data on NFL team performance, ticket prices, market populations, median incomes, won-loss records and multiple other factors. We create statistical models of box office revenue, and then see which teams over- and under- perform the model’s predictions.
See the above quote...and note how bogus it is in terms of measuring fan loyalty.
"Team performance?" "Won-Loss record" They must believe having a fan based on a pile of FRAKs is a good thing. They clearly believe apparently that only the winningest teams can have the best fans.
"Market population"? So, that must mean that the Los Angeles Nobodies have one of the best fan bases because LA is the second largest market?
"Median income"? So.....the teams that are in the market where people make the most money have the best fans?
Does anyone else recognize how ridiculously absurd these statements....and measurements are?
The real quality of the sports brand is revealed when fans support a team through the tough times. The Packers or Steelers will sell-out the year after they go 6-10, not so much for the Jaguars.
And look at the complete ignorance of the above statement. The Packers and the Steelers have been winning so much...yet this fucking idiot thinks that it is a great virtue because they happen to have an occasional bad season, and yet still support their team.
The measure of fan loyalty is what happens when a team has 10-15 years of bad performance.....not one scattered here or there.
This author is an idiot of epic proportion.
-
HERE is Fucking Fan "Equity".
The franchises that "awarded" their fan base....by doing well
During the current decade 2010 through 2014 the following 6 teams have the best records:
New England 70-21
Green Bay 62-23-1
Baltimore 59-31
Seattle 57-33
San Francisco 55-32-1
Pittsburgh 53-32
During the previous decade 2000-2009 the following 6 teams had the best records:
New England
Indianapolis
Pittsburgh
Philadelphia
Baltimore
And here are the teams that gave their fans little "Equity"
Worst records from 2010-2014:
Jacksonville 22-58
Cleveland 25-55
Oakland 27-53
Tampa Bay 27-53
Washington 28-52
St. Louis 29-50-1
Worst record in the 2000-2009 decade:
Detroit
Cleveland
Oakland
Arizona
Houston
Buffalo
Now, does anyone on God's green fucking earth really believe that the fans of New England, Seattle, Baltimore and the like are truly "better more loyal fans" than those of Cleveland, Oakland, Buffalo.....give the shit these latter teams have been given in this century?
Fucking HELL NO.
-
we use fifteen years of data on NFL team performance, ticket prices, market populations, median incomes, won-loss records and multiple other factors. We create statistical models of box office revenue, and then see which teams over- and under- perform the model’s predictions.
See the above quote...and note how bogus it is in terms of measuring fan loyalty.
"Team performance?" "Won-Loss record" They must believe having a fan based on a pile of FRAKs is a good thing. They clearly believe apparently that only the winningest teams can have the best fans.
"Market population"? So, that must mean that the Los Angeles Nobodies have one of the best fan bases because LA is the second largest market?
"Median income"? So.....the teams that are in the market where people make the most money have the best fans?
Does anyone else recognize how ridiculously absurd these statements....and measurements are?
The real quality of the sports brand is revealed when fans support a team through the tough times. The Packers or Steelers will sell-out the year after they go 6-10, not so much for the Jaguars.
And look at the complete ignorance of the above statement. The Packers and the Steelers have been winning so much...yet this fucking idiot thinks that it is a great virtue because they happen to have an occasional bad season, and yet still support their team.
The measure of fan loyalty is what happens when a team has 10-15 years of bad performance.....not one scattered here or there.
This author is an idiot of epic proportion.
we use fifteen years of data on NFL team performance, ticket prices, market populations, median incomes, won-loss records and multiple other factors. We create statistical models of box office revenue, and then see which teams over- and under- perform the model’s predictions. [/size]
See the above quote...and note how bogus it is in terms of measuring fan loyalty.[/size]
"Team performance?" "Won-Loss record" [/size]They must believe having a fan based on a pile of FRAKs is a good thing. They clearly believe apparently that only the winningest teams can have the best fans.[/size]
It simply says they use won-loss records, it doesn't imply what you stated. They're using 15 yrs. of data so perhaps a 7-9 Dallas team that sucked did much better than a 7-9 Cleveland team that sucked. I don't know, just guessing.
Did you see the "Social Media Equity"? metric. Cleve moves up to #13 on this one....but as far as fair weather fans, Cleve is in the top 10...ouch!
Our social media equity metric is similar in spirit to our fan equity measure, but rather than focus on revenues we use social community size as the key dependent measure. The calculation of social media equity involves a statistical model that predicts social media community size as a function of market characteristics and current season performance. Social media equity is then based on a comparison of actual versus predicted social media following.
The social media equity metric provides two key advantages relative to the revenue-premium metric. Since social media following is not constrained by stadium size and does not require fans to make a financial sacrifice, this metric provides 1) a measure of unconstrained demand and 2) avoids assumptions about owner’s pricing decisions.
Scroll to mid page.
https://scholarblogs.emory.edu/esma/nfl/2014-nfl-fan-quality-analysis/
-
we use fifteen years of data on NFL team performance, ticket prices, market populations, median incomes, won-loss records and multiple other factors. We create statistical models of box office revenue, and then see which teams over- and under- perform the model’s predictions. [/size]
See the above quote...and note how bogus it is in terms of measuring fan loyalty.[/size]
"Team performance?" "Won-Loss record" [/size]They must believe having a fan based on a pile of FRAKs is a good thing. They clearly believe apparently that only the winningest teams can have the best fans.[/size]
It simply says they use won-loss records, it doesn't imply what you stated. They're using 15 yrs. of data so perhaps a 7-9 Dallas team that sucked did much better than a 7-9 Cleveland team that sucked. I don't know, just guessing.
Did you see the "Social Media Equity"? metric. Cleve moves up to #13 on this one....but as far as fair weather fans, Cleve is in the top 10...ouch!
Our social media equity metric is similar in spirit to our fan equity measure, but rather than focus on revenues we use social community size as the key dependent measure. The calculation of social media equity involves a statistical model that predicts social media community size as a function of market characteristics and current season performance. Social media equity is then based on a comparison of actual versus predicted social media following.
The social media equity metric provides two key advantages relative to the revenue-premium metric. Since social media following is not constrained by stadium size and does not require fans to make a financial sacrifice, this metric provides 1) a measure of unconstrained demand and 2) avoids assumptions about owner’s pricing decisions.
Scroll to mid page.
https://scholarblogs.emory.edu/esma/nfl/2014-nfl-fan-quality-analysis/
Stuart said:
It simply says they use won-loss records, it doesn't imply what you stated. They're using 15 yrs. of data so perhaps a 7-9 Dallas team that sucked did much better than a 7-9 Cleveland team that sucked. I don't know, just guessing.
They said they used it as one of the factors....I said they used it as one of the factors.....They said the exact same thing I said...except I said it was stupid.
And....absolutely they infer that having a winning record is a factor in fan loyalty. I don't what you were reading.
Did you see the "Social Media Equity"? metric. Cleve moves up to #13 on this one....but as far as fair weather fans, Cleve is in the top 10...ouch!
Now, even you as a Steeler fan know how fucking stupid that is,
Our social media equity metric is similar in spirit to our fan equity measure, but rather than focus on revenues we use social community size as the key dependent measure. The calculation of social media equity involves a statistical model that predicts social media community size as a function of market characteristics and current season performance. Social media equity is then based on a comparison of actual versus predicted social media following.
The social media equity metric provides two key advantages relative to the revenue-premium metric. Since social media following is not constrained by stadium size and does not require fans to make a financial sacrifice, this metric provides 1) a measure of unconstrained demand and 2) avoids assumptions about owner’s pricing decisions.
Scroll to mid page.
https://scholarblogs.emory.edu/esma/nfl/2014-nfl-fan-quality-analysis/
Are you trying to say that the quality of the fanbase is somehow attached to the size of the stadium and how much they are asked to pay for their tickets? Or how much they are spending on paraphenalia?
It is ignorance upon ignorance upon ignorance.
It is a fallacious conclusion based on fallacious data.
A team who has been losing over and over and over, yet supports their team with sellouts year after year after year is a "fair weather" fan city. That can include Cleveland and Oakland and Buffalo etc.
Sorry, these guys are full of the shit of the fucking Christmas goose.
Just imagine what would happen in a place like New England if they had a long streak of losing. We know that it was practically crickets time the last time Pisstown had a few mediocre years. Even now they have more no-shows than anyone.
Sorry...to me, the test of time, the test of the loyalty of a fan base is what happens when that team has a prolonged losing period. Jax may not come out so well. Obviously Cleveland comes out well....you can attest to that.
-
Stuart said:
It simply says they use won-loss records, it doesn't imply what you stated. They're using 15 yrs. of data so perhaps a 7-9 Dallas team that sucked did much better than a 7-9 Cleveland team that sucked. I don't know, just guessing.
They said they used it as one of the factors....I said they used it as one of the factors.....They said the exact same thing I said...except I said it was stupid.
And....absolutely they infer that having a winning record is a factor in fan loyalty. I don't what you were reading.
Did you see the "Social Media Equity"? metric. Cleve moves up to #13 on this one....but as far as fair weather fans, Cleve is in the top 10...ouch!
Now, even you as a Steeler fan know how fucking stupid that is,
Our social media equity metric is similar in spirit to our fan equity measure, but rather than focus on revenues we use social community size as the key dependent measure. The calculation of social media equity involves a statistical model that predicts social media community size as a function of market characteristics and current season performance. Social media equity is then based on a comparison of actual versus predicted social media following.
The social media equity metric provides two key advantages relative to the revenue-premium metric. Since social media following is not constrained by stadium size and does not require fans to make a financial sacrifice, this metric provides 1) a measure of unconstrained demand and 2) avoids assumptions about owner’s pricing decisions.
Scroll to mid page.
https://scholarblogs.emory.edu/esma/nfl/2014-nfl-fan-quality-analysis/
Are you trying to say that the quality of the fanbase is somehow attached to the size of the stadium and how much they are asked to pay for their tickets? Or how much they are spending on paraphenalia?
It is ignorance upon ignorance upon ignorance.
It is a fallacious conclusion based on fallacious data.
A team who has been losing over and over and over, yet supports their team with sellouts year after year after year is a "fair weather" fan city. That can include Cleveland and Oakland and Buffalo etc.
Sorry, these guys are full of the shit of the fucking Christmas goose.
Just imagine what would happen in a place like New England if they had a long streak of losing. We know that it was practically crickets time the last time Pisstown had a few mediocre years. Even now they have more no-shows than anyone.
Sorry...to me, the test of time, the test of the loyalty of a fan base is what happens when that team has a prolonged losing period. Jax may not come out so well. Obviously Cleveland comes out well....you can attest to that.
It simply says they use won-loss records, it doesn't imply what you stated. They're using 15 yrs. of data so perhaps a 7-9 Dallas team that sucked did much better than a 7-9 Cleveland team that sucked. I don't know, just guessing.
They said they used it as one of the factors....I said they used it as one of the factors.....They said the exact same thing I said...except I said it was stupid.
And....absolutely they infer that having a winning record is a factor in fan loyalty. I don't what you were reading.
You said...
"Team performance?" "Won-Loss record" They must believe having a fan based on a pile of FRAKs is a good thing. They clearly believe apparently that only the winningest teams can have the best fans.
I said there's no evidence that they were using wins losses in a way that presumes a 14-2 must have better fans than a 2-14 team...as you just presumed they did. I agree, that would be just too ridiculous.
I said that they could be using wins losses in an apples to apples comparison...comparing fan loyalty to a 2-14 Dallas team to the fan loyalty of a 2-14 Cleveland team for example. Which team had the better fans during down times.
Boy do you sound snarky today! You are clearly upset over the results of this study.
-
I saw this and it really doesn't ring true to me and I'm pretty critical of the organization. Just as a quick guess I'd rank Browns fans in the top third of NFL fans, truly one of the most passionate fan bases but a bit delusional at times.
-
Alex Scheiner actually was asked about this, and when it was mentioned that one of the driving factors was how much the fans spend on tix/merch, he wasn't surprised. Basically, we have some of the lowest prices for that in the league, so it's not a shock. He also picked the bills as being down low, because they have lost cost merch etc and picked the top teams based on how much their stuff costs. An interesting read, and actually reassuring that we have someone so savvy in charge.
http://www.cleveland.com/pluto/index.ssf/2015/07/cleveland_browns_have_terry_ta_11.html
-
This article reads like it was prepared by 2 MBA marketing profs rather than sports fans. No sane person puts the Browns at the bottom of a list of passionate fans - this list is from the perspective of total dollars spent.
"It’s one thing to just say you are a fan of a local team, and quite another to be willing to pay several thousand dollars to purchase a season ticket."
Of course, it never occurred to them that Browns fans might demand a well-run organization before rewarding a tone-deaf Ahole owner with their money.
-
And that's exactly what Scheiner was saying. The passion is there, but the Browns are being penalised on this list for not charging the fans more money.
-
It simply says they use won-loss records, it doesn't imply what you stated. They're using 15 yrs. of data so perhaps a 7-9 Dallas team that sucked did much better than a 7-9 Cleveland team that sucked. I don't know, just guessing.
They said they used it as one of the factors....I said they used it as one of the factors.....They said the exact same thing I said...except I said it was stupid.
And....absolutely they infer that having a winning record is a factor in fan loyalty. I don't what you were reading.
You said...
"Team performance?" "Won-Loss record" They must believe having a fan based on a pile of FRAKs is a good thing. They clearly believe apparently that only the winningest teams can have the best fans.
I said there's no evidence that they were using wins losses in a way that presumes a 14-2 must have better fans than a 2-14 team...as you just presumed they did. I agree, that would be just too ridiculous.
I said that they could be using wins losses in an apples to apples comparison...comparing fan loyalty to a 2-14 Dallas team to the fan loyalty of a 2-14 Cleveland team for example. Which team had the better fans during down times.
Boy do you sound snarky today! You are clearly upset over the results of this study.
Stuart said:
You said...
"Team performance?" "Won-Loss record" They must believe having a fan based on a pile of FRAKs is a good thing. They clearly believe apparently that only the winningest teams can have the best fans.
I said there's no evidence that they were using wins losses in a way that presumes a 14-2 must have better fans than a 2-14 team...as you just presumed they did. I agree, that would be just too ridiculous.
What are you talking about? THEY said that "team performance" "won-lost record" was one of the factors they used in measuring "fan quality".
What is it about that that you think I am misinterpreting?
I said that they could be using wins losses in an apples to apples comparison...comparing fan loyalty to a 2-14 Dallas team to the fan loyalty of a 2-14 Cleveland team for example. Which team had the better fans during down times.
Again, I am just not seeing where that is what they are saying.
Boy do you sound snarky today! You are clearly upset over the results of this study.
Well, any study that concludes that the fans of the Cleveland Browns are the "second worse in the NFL" or are "fair weather fans" is clearly defective. Even you have to concede that.
-
Alex Scheiner actually was asked about this, and when it was mentioned that one of the driving factors was how much the fans spend on tix/merch, he wasn't surprised. Basically, we have some of the lowest prices for that in the league, so it's not a shock. He also picked the bills as being down low, because they have lost cost merch etc and picked the top teams based on how much their stuff costs. An interesting read, and actually reassuring that we have someone so savvy in charge.
http://www.cleveland.com/pluto/index.ssf/2015/07/cleveland_browns_have_terry_ta_11.html
Alex Scheiner actually was asked about this, and when it was mentioned that one of the driving factors was how much the fans spend on tix/merch, he wasn't surprised. Basically, we have some of the lowest prices for that in the league, so it's not a shock. He also picked the bills as being down low, because they have lost cost merch etc and picked the top teams based on how much their stuff costs. An interesting read, and actually reassuring that we have someone so savvy in charge.
http://www.cleveland.com/pluto/index.ssf/2015/07/cleveland_browns_have_terry_ta_11.html
Well, this does not factor in true "fandom"...in my view. How much is spent on buying a team's shit?
That is a total FRAK factor. Teams that win attract the FRAKs....FRAKs buy the NFL shit.
Long term shitty teams don't attract the FRAKs. It has absolutely nothing to do with fan loyalty....but the size of the fan base plus which is also very much geared to the size of a market. They give NY Jet fans a high ranking. Well.....there are 20 million people in the NYC area, compared to about 3 million here. Of course a team from a much much larger populated area is going to sell more shit. As for Dallas, even without their nationwide tits and ass backers, they have a huge natural fan base. Combine Dallas/Ft. Worth/San Antonio/Austin....and you have a populace about as large as the LA area.
So, absolutely this study is completely flawed at what it seems to be trying to measure: fan Loyalty.
-
And that's exactly what Scheiner was saying. The passion is there, but the Browns are being penalised on this list for not charging the fans more money.
And that's exactly what Scheiner was saying. The passion is there, but the Browns are being penalised on this list for not charging the fans more money.
Yea, sorry, I think these guys are just trying to put together a study where the overriding factor is money.....not loyalty, sportsmanship etc. They are "marketing people"......only interested in the marketing aspect, not the fan aspect.
My daughter is a sports marketing and management minor....I am going to e-mail this link to her and see what she says.
-
I guess you can make a case that the more passionate the fans, the more willing they are to pay higher prices, but that presupposes that the organisation wants to milk the fans for as much as possible.
-
I guess you can make a case that the more passionate the fans, the more willing they are to pay higher prices, but that presupposes that the organisation wants to milk the fans for as much as possible.
I guess you can make a case that the more passionate the fans, the more willing they are to pay higher prices, but that presupposes that the organisation wants to milk the fans for as much as possible.
Right.....and that is why the term used in that study "Fan Equity" is such a bogus label. What the fuck are these assholes trying to say?
Ownership provides an obviously loyal, passionate fanbase a pile of shit year after year after year and these dickwads think that the measurement of loyalty is how much they spend on tickets?
At least give the Browns credit.....they know they have fucked their loyal fans over by providing a consistently poor product, and as a result they have kept the cost low.
At least there is a certain amount of what I would call "fan equity" in that.
Hello! It looks like you're interested in this conversation, but you don't have an account yet.
Getting fed up of having to scroll through the same posts each visit? When you register for an account, you'll always come back to exactly where you were before, and choose to be notified of new replies (either via email, or push notification). You'll also be able to save bookmarks and upvote posts to show your appreciation to other community members.
With your input, this post could be even better đź’—
Register Login