Jump to content
DieHardBrownsFan

Study has Browns as one of the WORST fan bases

Recommended Posts

2 hours ago, Ghoolie said:

Football is NOT cyclical. Whatthefucck cycle explains the Patriots....Browns.

Think back...to when you were a little boy...and the steelers stunk 'almost' as bad as we've been.  And the Browns were so good.

My grandfather, the Pirates / Steelers fan......we'd go visit him and he'd say, "Oh Allen.  Your Browns beat us up bad again last week."  

What goes around, comes around, if ya live long enough.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Orion said:

Think back...to when you were a little boy...and the steelers stunk 'almost' as bad as we've been.  And the Browns were so good.

My grandfather, the Pirates / Steelers fan......we'd go visit him and he'd say, "Oh Allen.  Your Browns beat us up bad again last week."  

What goes around, comes around, if ya live long enough.

Almost all sports is cyclical, the time frames may vary a bit. The best teams ever had bad streaks, DAL, SF, NE, PIT, BAL (COLTS), NYG, GB.....duh, all of them.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, Ghoolie said:

Bubby Brister was better than any QB the Browns have had since 1999.

That has nothing to do with Browns quarterbacks, and it doesn't change the fact the Steelers sucked worse than the Browns before 1972. I know your BS too well, when beaten, create a diversion, or try and change the subject. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, hoorta said:

That has nothing to do with Browns quarterbacks, and it doesn't change the fact the Steelers sucked worse than the Browns before 1972. I know your BS too well, when beaten, create a diversion, or try and change the subject. 

The only way to beat a troll is to ignore a troll. 

You are probably the most guilty of anyone of continually falling for Ghoolie's nonsense. Why does he rag on the Browns so hard? Because he knows he can get a reaction. Why did he all the sudden love what the Browns did this draft? Because he knew you guys would fall over yourself congratulating him for "seeing the light". Why did he do a complete 180 and think the Browns blew the draft? Because he knew you guys would be all "OH WHAT THE HELL!" The most hilarious thing about his nonsense is that some of you actually try to debate and reason with a guy WHOSE OPINIONS ARE BASED STRICTLY ON TRYING TO GET A REACTION FROM YOU. 

You want to really stick it to a troll like Ghoolie? Don't respond to him. Every Ghoolie post that gets no reaction drives him nuts. Getting a reaction out of Browns fans is his life on here. Yes, it's pathetic, and needy... But it's his sad, sad life. 

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 hours ago, Ghoolie said:

Football is NOT cyclical. Whatthefucck cycle explains the Patriots....Browns......................    Please, oh cement cranium, I am dying to hear this analysis. THe Steelers and Patriots both are teams with systems and philosophies in place. The Steelers indeed are not likely to just find a replacement for Ben.... HOWEVER................... they will NEVER go into the kind of "cycle" the Browns have been in since 1999. THere is nothing cyclical about this.

The Steelers draft playmakers.................. The Browns purposely have refrained from drafting playmakers

Steeler teams are vicious..........The Browns are passive, zone, prevent, pussy Zumba tackling queers.

Steeler teams are disciplined...................... The Browns remain the most undisciplined team perhaps in the history of the NFL

The Steelers are QB intense....BIG QBs................ The Browns think QBs should be homosexual sizes.

Football is cyclical because talent is cyclical.  Because Great coaches,  players...and talent evaluators  come and go.  

If football is not cyclical, then the Browns would have always been the team that appeared in  10 consecutive Championship games.  

They would have always been the team that between 1946 and 1973 had 26 winning seasons, one losing season, and 1 .500 season.

And the Steelers were the losingest team in football for a 40 year period.

So:  Paul Brown died.   Dan Rooney died.  Bill Walsh died.  Vince Lombardi died.

Otto Graham retired.   BB will retire,  Brady will retire. Ben R. will retire.  New people take over.

The new "vicious" team in the AFC anyway may be the Jacksonville Jaguars.  The Steelers defense now is a bunch of Merengue dancers.

The Montreal Canadiennes may be the greatest dynasty in North American sports history.    They have been one of the worst teams in their league the last few years.

Only someone as ignorant as a Goat would not understand this.   Or, rather, should I say, only someone as ignorant as a Steeler fan....most of whom do not have the brains of goats.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 hours ago, Ghoolie said:

Bubby Brister was better than any QB the Browns have had since 1999.

 

Maybe, But now we have 3 new QBs on the Browns roster:   Taylor, Stanton, Mayfield.   ALL of them may be better than Bubby ever was.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Dutch Oven said:

The only way to beat a troll is to ignore a troll. 

You are probably the most guilty of anyone of continually falling for Ghoolie's nonsense. Why does he rag on the Browns so hard? Because he knows he can get a reaction. Why did he all the sudden love what the Browns did this draft? Because he knew you guys would fall over yourself congratulating him for "seeing the light". Why did he do a complete 180 and think the Browns blew the draft? Because he knew you guys would be all "OH WHAT THE HELL!" The most hilarious thing about his nonsense is that some of you actually try to debate and reason with a guy WHOSE OPINIONS ARE BASED STRICTLY ON TRYING TO GET A REACTION FROM YOU. 

You want to really stick it to a troll like Ghoolie? Don't respond to him. Every Ghoolie post that gets no reaction drives him nuts. Getting a reaction out of Browns fans is his life on here. Yes, it's pathetic, and needy... But it's his sad, sad life. 

So, your non- response response to him is just as likely to get a response from him as if you had responded directly to him.  So, why don't you just respond to him instead of trying to use surrogates to do so.

  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, The Gipper said:

Maybe, But now we have 3 new QBs on the Browns roster:   Taylor, Stanton, Mayfield.   ALL of them may be better than Bubby ever was.

OK so someone started digging up this manure pile let's see what the facts show on teams primarily better than the BROWNS in the same period :

 

Year Age Tm Pos No. G GS QBrec Cmp Att Cmp% Yds TD TD% Int Int% Lng Y/A AY/A Y/C Y/G Rate Sk Yds NY/A ANY/A Sk% 4QC GWD AV
Career       99 75 37-38-0 1207 2212 54.6 14445 81 3.7 78 3.5 90 6.5 5.7 12.0 145.9 72.3 193 1625 5.33 4.54 8.0 9 11 44
7 yrs PIT     61 57 28-29-0 776 1477 52.5 10104 51 3.5 57 3.9 90 6.8 5.8 13.0 165.6 69.8 145 1261 5.45 4.50 8.9 6 8 36
3 yrs DEN     10 4 4-0-0 96 160 60.0 1121 10 6.3 6 3.8 48 7.0 6.6 11.7 112.1 86.5 7 49 6.42 6.00 4.2     5
2 yrs PHI     17 10 4-6-0 232 385 60.3 2412 16 4.2 6 1.6 58 6.3 6.4 10.4 141.9 85.8 24 187 5.44 5.56 5.9 2 2 7
1 yr MIN     2 0   10 20 50.0 82 0 0.0 1 5.0 20 4.1 1.9 8.2 41.0 40.0 1 6 3.62 1.48 4.8     0
1 yr NYJ     9 4 1-3-0 93 170 54.7 726 4 2.4 8 4.7 32 4.3 2.6 7.8 80.7 53.7 16 122 3.25 1.74 8.6 1 1 -4
1986 24 PIT qb 6 2 2 0-2-0 21 60 35.0 291 0 0.0 2 3.3 58 4.9 3.4 13.9 145.5 37.6 6 57 3.55 2.18 9.1     1
1987 25 PIT   6 2 0   4 12 33.3 20 0 0.0 3 25.0 10 1.7 -9.6 5.0 10.0 2.8 2 14 0.43 -9.21 14.3     0
1988 26 PIT QB 6 13 13 4-9-0 175 370 47.3 2634 11 3.0 14 3.8 89 7.1 6.0 15.1 202.6 65.3 36 292 5.77 4.76 8.9 1 1 10
1989 27 PIT QB 6 14 14 8-6-0 187 342 54.7 2365 9 2.6 10 2.9 79 6.9 6.1 12.6 168.9 73.1 45 452 4.94 4.25 11.6 1 1 8
1990 28 PIT QB 6 16 16 9-7-0 223 387 57.6 2725 20 5.2 14 3.6 90 7.0 6.4 12.2 170.3 81.6 28 213 6.05 5.50 6.7 2 2 10
1991 29 PIT qb 6 8 8 5-3-0 103 190 54.2 1350 9 4.7 9 4.7 65 7.1 5.9 13.1 168.8 72.9 15 145 5.88 4.78 7.3 0 2 4
1992 30 PIT qb 6 6 4 2-2-0 63 116 54.3 719 2 1.7 5 4.3 42 6.2 4.6 11.4 119.8 61.0 13 88 4.89 3.46 10.1 2 2 3
1993 31 PHI QB 6 10 8 4-4-0 181 309 58.6 1905 14 4.5 5 1.6 58 6.2 6.3 10.5 190.5 84.9 19 148 5.36 5.52 5.8 2 2 6
1994 32 PHI qb 6 7 2 0-2-0 51 76 67.1 507 2 2.6 1 1.3 53 6.7 6.6 9.9 72.4 89.1 5 39 5.78 5.72 6.2     1
1995 33 NYJ qb 6 9 4 1-3-0 93 170 54.7 726 4 2.4 8 4.7 32 4.3 2.6 7.8 80.7 53.7 16 122 3.25 1.74 8.6 1 1 -4
1997 35 DEN   6 1 0   6 9 66.7 48 0 0.0 0 0.0 15 5.3 5.3 8.0 48.0 79.9 0 0 5.33 5.33 0.0     0
1998 36 DEN qb 6 7 4 4-0-0 78 131 59.5 986 10 7.6 3 2.3 48 7.5 8.0 12.6 140.9 99.0 7 49 6.79 7.26 5.1     5
1999 37 DEN   6 2 0   12 20 60.0 87 0 0.0 3 15.0 11 4.4 -2.4 7.3 43.5 30.6 0 0 4.35 -2.40 0.0     0
2000 38 MIN   6 2 0   10 20 50.0 82 0 0.0 1 5.0 20 4.1 1.9 8.2 41.0 40.0 1 6 3.62 1.48 4.8     0

Steelrz during the "Brister Era", conclusion......eh. Nothing really to brag about. 

oster / Stats
1992 11-5-0 1st -- AFC Central 0-1 - Lost Divisional Playoffs Bill Cowher Roster / Stats.........28-29, eh, playoffs 1-1 won a WC game for pit, eh.
1991 7-9-0 2nd -- AFC Central -- Chuck Noll Roster / Stats
1990 9-7-0 3rd -- AFC Central -- Chuck Noll Roster / Stats
1989 9-7-0 T2nd -- AFC Central 1-1 - Lost Divisional Playoffs Chuck Noll Roster / Stats
1988 5-11-0 4th -- AFC Central -- Chuck Noll Roster / Stats
1987 8-7-0 3rd -- AFC Central -- Chuck Noll Roster / Stats
1986 6-10-0 3rd -- AFC Central -- Chuck Noll Roster / Stats

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

And here are Tyrod's numbers:

Passing

 
 
Year Age Tm Pos No. G GS QBrec Cmp Att Cmp% Yds TD TD% Int Int% Lng Y/A AY/A Y/C Y/G Rate QBR Sk Yds NY/A ANY/A Sk% 4QC GWD AV
Career       58 43 22-20-0 793 1271 62.4 9056 51 4.0 18 1.4 84 7.1 7.3 11.4 156.1 91.2   129 693 5.97 6.12 9.2 3 5 41
4 yrs BAL     14 0   19 35 54.3 199 0 0.0 2 5.7 25 5.7 3.1 10.5 14.2 47.2   5 33 4.15 1.90 12.5     1
3 yrs BUF     44 43 22-20-0 774 1236 62.6 8857 51 4.1 16 1.3 84 7.2 7.4 11.4 201.3 92.5   124 660 6.03 6.25 9.1 3 5 40
2011 22 BAL   2 3 0   1 1 100.0 18 0 0.0 0 0.0 18 18.0 18.0 18.0 6.0 118.7 13.9 2 3 5.00 5.00 66.7     0
2012 23 BAL   2 7 0   17 29 58.6 179 0 0.0 1 3.4 25 6.2 4.6 10.5 25.6 62.3 52.3 3 30 4.66 3.25 9.4     1
2013 24 BAL   2 3 0   1 5 20.0 2 0 0.0 1 20.0 2 0.4 -8.6 2.0 0.7 0.0 74.8 0 0 0.40 -8.60 0.0     0
2014 25 BAL   2 1 0   0 0   0 0   0   0       0.0   1.7 0 0           0
2015* 26 BUF QB/wr 5 14 14 7-6-0 242 380 63.7 3035 20 5.3 6 1.6 63 8.0 8.3 12.5 216.8 99.4 65.3 36 212 6.79 7.10 8.7 1 2 13
2016 27 BUF QB 5 15 15 7-8-0 269 436 61.7 3023 17 3.9 6 1.4 84 6.9 7.1 11.2 201.5 89.7 61.4 42 192 5.92 6.07 8.8 1 1 15
2017 28 BUF QB 5 15 14 8-6-0 263 420 62.6 2799 14 3.3 4 1.0 47 6.7 6.9 10.6 186.6 89.2 56.4 46 256 5.46 5.67 9.9 1 2 12

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Bubby Boy was 28-29 as a starter for the Steelers

TT was 22-20 as a starter for the Bills.

Bubby gave way to a younger player, Neil O'Donnell who led the Steelers to a Super Bowl.

TT may give way to a younger player....Baker Mayfield, who may one day lead the Browns to the Super Bowl?

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, The Gipper said:

Bubby Boy was 28-29 as a starter for the Steelers

TT was 22-20 as a starter for the Bills.

Bubby gave way to a younger player, Neil O'Donnell who led the Steelers to a Super Bowl.

TT may give way to a younger player....Baker Mayfield, who may one day lead the Browns to the Super Bowl?

"Some" people just get confused with facts, numbers, logic. :lol:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, mjp28 said:

"Some" people just get confused with facts, numbers, logic. :lol:

Just trying to make things symmetrical!  ;)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, The Gipper said:

So, your non- response response to him is just as likely to get a response from him as if you had responded directly to him.  So, why don't you just respond to him instead of trying to use surrogates to do so.

You actually fall for his crap and waste your time debating a troll. 

I call him out for being a troll. 

If you can't see the difference, I can't help you. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Dutch Oven said:

You actually fall for his crap and waste your time debating a troll. 

I call him out for being a troll. 

If you can't see the difference, I can't help you. 

I can certainly see what he is.  I just don't mind it and take it as much to heart as you do. I have been engaging with Ghoolie on these boards since the old AOL days.

I give him shite, he gives me shite.  I call him a FRAK,  but I know that his flirtations with other teams is simply out of frustration for the way the Browns have been.  I would never have those flirtations, but that is just the way he rolls.  It is my team, and fuyuck all the others.  I know that he sees the quality that other teams some times play with, and he is envious of those qualities, and that is why he sometimes wants to glom on to those qualities.  He is just waiting....like all the rest of us, until the day that this Browns team becomes dominant again.  And I do not think for a moment that he will then have flirtations with other teams. 

  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, The Gipper said:

Just trying to make things symmetrical!  ;)

One of those super organizational neat freaks, I can understand that. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 6/30/2018 at 2:00 PM, mjp28 said:

But they admit viewership is down, how does that bode for the future? Next answer? 

........oh would you sink $2,000,000,000 into a new stadium in 2018?

I think more and more people are going to sports bars to watch games rather than watch at home.  No way to account for that viewership.   The box Neilsen gives out to random households is no longer measuring who is watching football.  Those people are at sport bars across this country.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
25 minutes ago, ballpeen said:

I think more and more people are going to sports bars to watch games rather than watch at home.  No way to account for that viewership.   The box Neilsen gives out to random households is no longer measuring who is watching football.  Those people are at sport bars across this country.

Some are but not nearly all though, that isn't the biggest problem out there.

There are hard numbers that American tackle football numbers are going down in participation, attendance, viewership at all levels. Some high schools are cutting back to 7/7 or discontinuing football altogether. 

Then there's the continuing CTE issues out there, moms want junior to play soccer.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

2017 from the NCAA.....   

ALL NCAA TEAMS      http://www.ncaa.org/championships/statistics/ncaa-football-attendance
Total 
Teams Games Attendance Average
Change In 
Total
Change In 
Avg.
Home Attendance, Division I-FBS 129 810 34,107,211 42,108 -693,708 -962
FBS Neutral-Site Attendance $ 22 1,262,707 57,396 -352,480 -4,727
FBS Bowl Game Attendance # 40 1,620,253 40,506 -90,171 -1,212
NCAA DIVISION I-FBS TOTALS 129 868 36,632,625 42,203 -1,441,042 -1,409


Home Attendance, Division I-FCS 123 657 5,123,547 7,798 114,123 -17
FCS Neutral-Site Attendance ^$ 12 366,640 30,553 -83,469 -4,071
FCS Championship Game 1 19,090 19,090 4,667 4,667
NCAA DIVISION I-FCS TOTALS 123 670 5,509,277 8,223 35,321 -134


NCAA DIVISION I TOTALS 252 1,538 42,141,902 27,400 -1,405,721 -1,100
Home Attendance, NCAA Division II & 168 895 2,859,249 3,195 -168,401 -128
Division II Neutral-Site Attendance ^$ 13 111,637 8,587 -68,217 -1,405
Division II Championship Game 1 4,259 4,259 -5,317 -5,317
NCAA DIVISION II TOTALS 168 909 2,975,145 3,273 -241,935 -186
Home Attendance, NCAA Division III & 243 1,225 2,297,267 1,875 -105,606 -83
Division III Neutral-Site Attendance ^ 5 3,478 696 -5,602 -439
Division III Championship Game 1 4,971 4,971 1,495 1,495
NCAA DIVISION III TOTALS 243 1,231 2,305,716 1,873 -109,713 -81
Home Attendance, Reclassifying Teams 3 17 199,433 11,731 63,708 5,830


NATIONAL TOTALS FOR 2017 & 666 3,695 47,622,196 12,888 -1,693,661 -380 <---- all college down 1.7 million

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, mjp28 said:

2017 from the NCAA.....   

ALL NCAA TEAMS      http://www.ncaa.org/championships/statistics/ncaa-football-attendance
Total 
Teams Games Attendance Average
Change In 
Total
Change In 
Avg.
Home Attendance, Division I-FBS 129 810 34,107,211 42,108 -693,708 -962
FBS Neutral-Site Attendance $ 22 1,262,707 57,396 -352,480 -4,727
FBS Bowl Game Attendance # 40 1,620,253 40,506 -90,171 -1,212
NCAA DIVISION I-FBS TOTALS 129 868 36,632,625 42,203 -1,441,042 -1,409


Home Attendance, Division I-FCS 123 657 5,123,547 7,798 114,123 -17
FCS Neutral-Site Attendance ^$ 12 366,640 30,553 -83,469 -4,071
FCS Championship Game 1 19,090 19,090 4,667 4,667
NCAA DIVISION I-FCS TOTALS 123 670 5,509,277 8,223 35,321 -134


NCAA DIVISION I TOTALS 252 1,538 42,141,902 27,400 -1,405,721 -1,100
Home Attendance, NCAA Division II & 168 895 2,859,249 3,195 -168,401 -128
Division II Neutral-Site Attendance ^$ 13 111,637 8,587 -68,217 -1,405
Division II Championship Game 1 4,259 4,259 -5,317 -5,317
NCAA DIVISION II TOTALS 168 909 2,975,145 3,273 -241,935 -186
Home Attendance, NCAA Division III & 243 1,225 2,297,267 1,875 -105,606 -83
Division III Neutral-Site Attendance ^ 5 3,478 696 -5,602 -439
Division III Championship Game 1 4,971 4,971 1,495 1,495
NCAA DIVISION III TOTALS 243 1,231 2,305,716 1,873 -109,713 -81
Home Attendance, Reclassifying Teams 3 17 199,433 11,731 63,708 5,830


NATIONAL TOTALS FOR 2017 & 666 3,695 47,622,196 12,888 -1,693,661 -380 <---- all college down 1.7 million

Can you interpret this gobbledygook of numbers?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Outside of the BIG TEN all major conferences were down in 2017:

CONFERENCE ATTENDANCE

1. Southeastern 14 98 7,357,228 75,074 -2,433
2. Big Ten 14 95 6,291,534 66,227 76
3. Big 12 10 65 3,695,374 56,852 -679
4. Pac-12 12 79 3,918,463 49,601 -472
5. Atlantic Coast 14 93 4,505,142 48,442 -1,292

Total Home Attendance
No. School Games Attendance Average
1. Michigan 6 669,534 111,589
2. Ohio St. 7 752,464 107,495
3. Penn St. 7 746,946 106,707
4. Alabama 7 712,053 101,722
5. Texas A&M 7 691,612 98,802
6. LSU 6 591,034 98,506
7. Tennessee 7 670,454 95,779
8. Texas 6 556,667 92,778
9. Georgia 6 556,476 92,746

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ oh if it weren't for these big always SOLD OUT mega stadiums it would be worse
10. Nebraska 7 628,583 89,798
11. Florida 6 520,290 86,715
12. Oklahoma 6 519,119 86,520
13. Auburn 7 605,120 86,446
14. Clemson 7 565,412 80,773
15. Wisconsin 7 551,766 78,824
16. South Carolina 7 550,099 78,586
17. Notre Dame 7 543,354 77,622
18. Southern California 7 508,781 72,683
19. Michigan St. 7 507,398 72,485
20. Florida St. 6 425,658 70,943
21. Washington 7 481,755 68,822
22. Iowa 7 464,357 66,337

Edited by mjp28

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, The Gipper said:

Can you interpret this gobbledygook of numbers?

Use the link, it's really self-explanatory. Attendance keeps going down.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

And the NFL is still the big dog, only 16 games each but the bottom half in average home games filleD percentages:

                           
                           
                           
17 New Orleans 8 585,113 73,139 95.6 8 560,933 70,116 94.6 16 1,146,046 71,627 95.1
18 Jacksonville 8 514,427 64,303 95.6 8 535,141 66,892 95.4 16 1,049,568 65,598 95.5
19 Tennessee 8 525,214 65,651 95.0 8 514,905 64,363 95.0 16 1,040,119 65,007 95.0
20 NY Jets 8 620,496 77,562 94.0 8 522,862 65,357 93.5 16 1,143,358 71,459 93.8
21 NY Giants 8 617,434 77,179 93.6 8 565,603 70,700 95.3 16 1,183,037 73,939 94.4
22 Dallas 8 741,775 92,721 92.7 8 567,436 70,929 97.0 16 1,309,211 81,825 94.5
23 Oakland 8 462,201 57,775 91.5 8 527,346 65,918 102.5 16 989,547 61,846 97.0
24 Buffalo 8 534,200 66,775 91.4 8 506,717 63,339 100.5 16 1,040,917 65,057 95.6
25 Minnesota 8 533,769 66,721 91.4 8 566,136 70,767 98.5 16 1,099,905 68,744 94.9
26 Pittsburgh 8 499,768 62,471 91.3 8 536,723 67,090 98.2 16 1,036,491 64,780 94.8
27 Tampa Bay 8 479,618 59,952 91.0 8 557,343 69,667 97.0 16 1,036,961 64,810 94.1
28 Washington 8 601,405 75,175 88.4 8 536,234 67,029 94.8 16 1,137,639 71,102 91.3
29 Cleveland 8 511,060 63,882 87.3 8 456,947 57,118 98.2 16 968,007 60,500 92.1
30 Cincinnati 8 426,207 53,275 81.3 8 552,316 69,039 96.7 16 978,523 61,157 89.3
31 Los Angeles 8 507,136 63,392 67.7 8 555,125 69,390 93.7 16 1,062,261 66,391 79.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
23 minutes ago, mjp28 said:

And the NFL is still the big dog, only 16 games each but the bottom half in average home games filleD percentages:

                           
                           
                           
17 New Orleans 8 585,113 73,139 95.6 8 560,933 70,116 94.6 16 1,146,046 71,627 95.1
18 Jacksonville 8 514,427 64,303 95.6 8 535,141 66,892 95.4 16 1,049,568 65,598 95.5
19 Tennessee 8 525,214 65,651 95.0 8 514,905 64,363 95.0 16 1,040,119 65,007 95.0
20 NY Jets 8 620,496 77,562 94.0 8 522,862 65,357 93.5 16 1,143,358 71,459 93.8
21 NY Giants 8 617,434 77,179 93.6 8 565,603 70,700 95.3 16 1,183,037 73,939 94.4
22 Dallas 8 741,775 92,721 92.7 8 567,436 70,929 97.0 16 1,309,211 81,825 94.5
23 Oakland 8 462,201 57,775 91.5 8 527,346 65,918 102.5 16 989,547 61,846 97.0
24 Buffalo 8 534,200 66,775 91.4 8 506,717 63,339 100.5 16 1,040,917 65,057 95.6
25 Minnesota 8 533,769 66,721 91.4 8 566,136 70,767 98.5 16 1,099,905 68,744 94.9
26 Pittsburgh 8 499,768 62,471 91.3 8 536,723 67,090 98.2 16 1,036,491 64,780 94.8
27 Tampa Bay 8 479,618 59,952 91.0 8 557,343 69,667 97.0 16 1,036,961 64,810 94.1
28 Washington 8 601,405 75,175 88.4 8 536,234 67,029 94.8 16 1,137,639 71,102 91.3
29 Cleveland 8 511,060 63,882 87.3 8 456,947 57,118 98.2 16 968,007 60,500 92.1
30 Cincinnati 8 426,207 53,275 81.3 8 552,316 69,039 96.7 16 978,523 61,157 89.3
31 Los Angeles 8 507,136 63,392 67.7 8 555,125 69,390 93.7 16 1,062,261 66,391 79.

Maybe you should provide the link on this as well.

Nevertheless....I believe these statistics are miniscule.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, The Gipper said:

Maybe you should provide the link on this as well.

Nevertheless....I believe these statistics are miniscule.

2017 nfl attendance - ESPN - http://www.espn.com/nfl/attendance/_/sort/homePct

It shows the top 9 NFL teams are running at 100% plus on home attendance but with only 8 home games per year they better do well.....and what's going on with pittsburger at #26 and 91%? And yes those stats are miniscule UNLESS they keep going down......and teams lie or stretch attendance numbers! Is JAX at 95%?

The NFL is still drawing but high school and college are not doing as well live. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, mjp28 said:

2017 nfl attendance - ESPN - http://www.espn.com/nfl/attendance/_/sort/homePct

It shows the top 9 NFL teams are running at 100% plus on home attendance but with only 8 home games per year they better do well.....and what's going on with pittsburger at #26 and 91%? And yes those stats are miniscule UNLESS they keep going down......and teams lie or stretch attendance numbers! Is JAX at 95%?

The NFL is still drawing but high school and college are not doing as well live. 

So maybe you should just give up watching then going to football games if you're so worried about it

  • Confused 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, The Gipper said:

So maybe you should just give up watching then going to football games if you're so worried about it

I'm not worried about it one bit.....just discussing fans and fan bases, besides I have a better seat at home.:lol:

Actually I've seen countless Indians games at the Ol' Muni from 1959-1980s closing and a LOT of Browns games throughout time. 

.......I kind of liked that Ol' Dump.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×