8 thoughts on “Fulham least popular team on TV last year

  1. Any table that suggests Cardiff, Crystal Palace and Hull are much bigger TV draws than Newcastle or West Ham is, I would venture, utterly meaningless!!

  2. well maybe but if you read a bit more you see that Cardiff had Man Utd at home and Swansea at home, while West Ham had a load of games, four of which were on BT and many of which drew hardly any viewers. So I don’t know. It’s not utterly meaningless – it just tells us how many people watched each team on tv last year. As grown ups with functioning brains we can then choose what we want to take out of it. If that’s “nothing” then so be it. In 24 hours I myself will have forgotten that this post ever existed. But for a fraction of a moment this felt half interesting, and so I shared it, and now it’s done. And in any case, 99% of the world is utterly meaningless. Football is absolutely meaningless. But our brains need crap to prevent us from crying at the futility of it all. Football is one thing that fills such a void.

  3. A few quick thoughts I’m not attempting to add up to anything in particular….A factor of only two between us and ManU (albeit assisted by that match at Old Trafford) is less than I might have guessed. All the numbers are less than I might have guessed. They’d need to be somewhat higher to make a less irritating case for actual live attendees having to leg it from London to Newcastle on a Monday night and similar malarkey. Overseas viewers plainly boost overall figures, but one wonders by how much. And how much are they depleted by online streaming and dodgy links in pubs?

    But look……we’d need to imagine loads and loads and loads of illicit viewers in order for even the ManU numbers to add up to true mass appeal, comparable to viewing figures for the World Cup Final (20 million-plus, was it?) and commensurate with all the acres and hours of media coverage.

    It happens that football grips me, but if it didn’t I might look at those figures and ask how come the sports pages are so dominated by this one sport. Presumably the media bosses know that sufficient people are in fact interested — it’s just that only a tiny percentage of the population actually watches football from one week to the next, as opposed to having a rentaquote view on its protagonists. More would if it were free, for sure. But still.

    1. I wondered this. Average figures of 1m a match.

      But Sky make a LOT of money: http://www.thisismoney.co.uk/money/markets/article-2371653/Sky-profits-rise-television-subscribers-numbers-close-plateau.html

      We are now a Sky household and they have us for broadband, phone and TV. I told Hade to cancel Sky Sports but they just offered us a half price deal and so she kept it. If they didn’t have the football I wouldn’t bother, even though I only watch Fulham games all the way through.

      I think your last paragraph is telling anyway. I think this comes across slightly in the game’s marketing. Barclays giving it all this “Thank you, Fans” thing, etc. People who actually watch games find this vaguely ridiculous, but perhaps to a more casual viewer it’s different. I don’t know. Some proper football market sizing/segmentation would be pretty interesting. The FSF must have done this. I will have a look.

  4. Last season we were woeful and not being a compeitive force isnt going to endear us to neutrals watching, as well as not getting exposure compared to EVERYONE which will garner the tv viewers. it’ll be a lot higher in 2 years time :-D , it’ll be interesting to see what TV figures we’ll get for the championship.

  5. It’s been a shame to see a string of anti-stats comments over the past month. Numbers are not meaningless or meaningful; they just are objective pieces of information that we can use to make inferences. Sometimes those inferences are wrong, but I’ve always appreciated that Rich (and Timmy) interpret stats with caution. If you think that their conclusions are wrong, it’s on you to come up with an explanation for why.

    And in this case, Rich is entirely correct. Crystal Palace, Cardiff and Hull are ‘bigger draws’ than WH and Newcastle because of how networks choose games to televise. CP only gets televised when they’re playing a big 4 (5? 6?) club, and more people watch Manchester United vs. Palace than West Ham vs. Newcastle. CP’s televised games were against: Arsenal (2X), Liverpool, Man City, Man U (2X), Sunderland, Spurs, and West Ham. In contrast, West Ham had televised games against West Brom, Southampton, Norwich, Swansea, CP, etc…

    It’d be easy to come up with a ‘value added’ model that would give a more appropriate picture of the drawing power of each team. Or, to get another perspective, it’d be interesting to see viewership statistics like this from the US, where viewers have the option of watching any game they want. It wouldn’t tell us anything about viewership in England (obviously!), it would solve the selection bias problem (i.e. – viewers can only choose between the games that are on TV).

  6. Number of games is also fascinating: one more than Stoke; same amount as Cardiff, who are in a different country.

    We’ll probably see … 3 in the Championship?

    1. Well that all depends on the narrative. Fulham were the ‘biggest’ team to go down, so there will be some curiosity there, and they’ve gone down and are still spending big, so will be perceived as one of the league’s big hitters. If they are competitive (sixth place and upwards) then I would expect at least as many as last season. They are already scheduled to be on three times before December anyway. http://www.football-league.co.uk/page/TVGamesDetail/0,,10794,00.html

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s