J Stadium/Allianz (24 Viewers)

[Post Ironic]

Gianduja

:ID:

 

Buy on AliExpress.com

[Maddy]

There being a connection between football quality and viewership does not mean that they are directly proportionate. There are other things that factor in its not 1 solo cause. You should know this its an obvious point.

Since when did this become about viewership? Now it's tiem for you to find soem numbers that backs your statement: that we can't fill our stadium due to "bad" football.

At the moment you area talking out of your ass.

 

[pitbull]

Yeah, people who find our football attractive (especially from the last season) are a tiny minority. There are common standards of aesthetic quality that most people can easily recognize within and across cultures.

You (snoozefest football lovers) are the BBW fetish lovers of football fans.

aesthetic quality is a fancy word for taste, actual quality in football is measured in results. I'd visit every home game of my national team if they played like Greece in 2004 and got results.

 

[zizinho]

I am glad I started this

werent you also the one who claimed Dortmund was superior to Turin a year or so ago?

 

[Hist]

werent you also the one who claimed Dortmund was superior to Turin a year or so ago?

No but now I wish I had.


Dortmund is superior to Turin.

- - - Updated - - -

aesthetic quality is a fancy word for taste, actual quality in football is measured in results. I'd visit every home game of my national team if they played like Greece in 2004 and got results.

Fine call it taste. Keep results as constant its not results vs attractiveness.

Do you agree that most people's "taste buds" for football will prefer to watch Ronaldinho's game over Sturaro? Wouldnt the incentive to watch Ronnie be higher for anyone than to watch Stu? If you prefer watching Stu that can be your taste but thats what I mean by getting turned on by BBWs or Golden Showers.

Subjective does not mean arbitrary or random.

 

[pitbull]

No but now I wish I had.


Dortmund is superior to Turin.

- - - Updated - - -



Fine call it taste. Keep results as constant its not results vs attractiveness.

Do you agree that most people's "taste buds" for football will prefer to watch Ronaldinho's game over Sturaro? Wouldnt the incentive to watch Ronnie be higher for anyone than to watch Stu? If you prefer watching Stu that can be your taste but thats what I mean by getting turned on by BBWs or Golden Showers.

Subjective does not mean arbitrary or random.

Keep results as a constant and you give me Sturaro vs Ronaldinho?

 

[Fint]

Are we over the 'rods' yet?

 

[Hist]

Keep results as a constant and you give me Sturaro vs Ronaldinho?

Yup. Extreme example but drives the point home. There is an obvious strong connection between aesthetic quality of the football being played and viewership/people's willingness to tune in, go to the stadium etc...

So again snoozefest football doesnt help.

- - - Updated - - -

Since when did this become about viewership? Now it's tiem for you to find soem numbers that backs your statement: that we can't fill our stadium due to "bad" football.

At the moment you area talking out of your ass.

Viewership or attendance its the same point you are resisting something obvious. People are less incentivized to watch 90 min of mispassing compared to great passing and wonder goals. That applies to watching on the TV or in person. You are being intentionally thick.

 

[Maddy]

Viewership or attendance its the same point you are resisting something obvious. People are less incentivized to watch 90 min of mispassing compared to great passing and wonder goals. That applies to watching on the TV or in person. You are being intentionally thick.

You are wrong. They are two completely different consumer groups.

Now to find the numbers that back your statement, that "bad" football is a reason why a club (Juve) can't fill its stadium.

And don't even get me started on "being thick". You made a statement, that you can't back by any other thing than your opinion, which is clearly biased by your own feelings and motives. You claim causation, but you can't even find correlation

Spoiler

I'm aware that there can be causation with correlation of 0, but still..

 

[pitbull]

Yup. Extreme example but drives the point home. There is an obvious strong connection between aesthetic quality of the football being played and viewership/people's willingness to tune in, go to the stadium etc...

So again snoozefest football doesnt help.

yeah, but results wise Sturaro and Ronaldinho are not the same. insert prime Sturaro in any Serie A team and nothing changes, insert prime Ronaldinho in any Serie A team and they're at least twice as good.

if you wanted to pair Sturaro with someone who's aesthetically pleasing, but brings a similar overall quality to the team, you should've went for Jorge Martinez. if you wanted to pair Ronaldinho with someone who's not aesthetically pleasing, but is among the best forwards to have ever played.. there is no such guy.

so tell me, is there really a difference between the crowds Sturaro brings and Jorge Martinez brings?

 

[Hist]

You are wrong. They are two completely different consumer groups.

Now to find the numbers that back your statement, that "bad" football is a reason why a club (Juve) can't fill its stadium.

And don't even get me started on "being thick". You made a statement, that you can't back by any other thing than your opinion, which is clearly biased by your own feelings and motives. You claim causation, but you can't even find correlation

Spoiler

I'm aware that there can be causation with correlation of 0, but still..

Its not like the numbers are widely available man. I am claiming a causal connection yes. All things constant but we play attractive offensive football instead of last season's football. Would the incentive to watch the game in person be greater or lesser? Its an obvious apriori point if you want to get technical.

Entertainment is one important driver of viewership its not the only one. The city is a variable. The economy is a variable. Ticket prices are a variable. The atmosphere is a variable. History is a variable. There are many variables. I really can't understand why you deny the quality of football as a variable.

I myself have watched Juve less than my previous normal partly due to the quality of the football being played. If I lived in Turin, my incentive to watch in person would decrease as well. I imagine its the same for most people.

I dont think this is specific to Juve. If I lived in manchester, the incentive to watch Pep's team is higher than Mancini's because I know I'll be watching better football. Same with Fergie vs Mou. Their fans are complaining for a reason and its not just because they arent #1. Capello at Madrid is another example.

 

[pitbull]

Its not like the numbers are widely available man. I am claiming a causal connection yes. All things constant but we play attractive offensive football instead of last season's football. Would the incentive to watch the game in person be greater or lesser? Its an obvious apriori point if you want to get technical.

Entertainment is one important driver of viewership its not the only one. The city is a variable. The economy is a variable. Ticket prices are a variable. The atmosphere is a variable. History is a variable. There are many variables. I really can't understand why you deny the quality of football as a variable.

I myself have watched Juve less than my previous normal partly due to the quality of the football being played. If I lived in Turin, my incentive to watch in person would decrease as well. I imagine its the same for most people.

I dont think this is specific to Juve. If I lived in manchester, the incentive to watch Pep's team is higher than Mancini's because I know I'll be watching better football. Same with Fergie vs Mou. Their fans are complaining for a reason and its not just because they arent #1. Capello at Madrid is another example.

Example of what? Were Bernabeu's ticket sales lower while Capello and Mourinho managed them? Or less people watched them on TV? Because if not, it's a shit example.

It does sound logical that high scoring games would have more people watching them, but truth is, my feeling is that people go watch success more than they go watch pretty footie, the fact that we're sold out with the high ticket prices we currently have seems to indicate that we'd easily have more people attending if the stadium was bigger.

 

[Seven]

The reason why you guys redesigned the stadium in the first place is because you couldn't fill it. Not only that, Juve does NOT have a lot of fans in Italy. Around the world, yes, but not that many in Italy.

I think orino for awhile was bringing more fans to the stadium. ot sure if that is true, but I did hear that somewhere.

Love this guy. Such a beacon of knowledge.

- - - Updated - - -

Apparently a city known for its baroque and art nouveau architecture, the fantastic piedmont wines (barolo and barbaresco especially), delicious chocolate, stunning location beneath the alps, and so on... such a city is not good enough for rich people.

Turin is a nice city compared to a lot of places in the world, but this is Italy.

 

[Hængebøffer]

Nothern Italy is rich as fuck. To say it’s not for rich people is ignorance at its finest.

 

[Hist]

Example of what? Were Bernabeu's ticket sales lower while Capello and Mourinho managed them? Or less people watched them on TV? Because if not, it's a shit example.

It does sound logical that high scoring games would have more people watching them, but truth is, my feeling is that people go watch success more than they go watch pretty footie, the fact that we're sold out with the high ticket prices we currently have seems to indicate that we'd easily have more people attending if the stadium was bigger.

I dont disagree with that at all. Success is a huge variable . The debate is about beautiful and successful vs boring and successful.

And yes I imagine if Madrid plays ugly for multiple seasons that will affect viewership. It's entertainment of course quality matters for $$$

 

[pitbull]

I dont disagree with that at all. Success is a huge variable . The debate is about beautiful and successful vs boring and successful.

And yes I imagine if Madrid plays ugly for multiple seasons that will affect viewership. It's entertainment of course quality matters for $$$

yet somehow what you imagine is not true, Zidane in all of his 3 seasons attracted less people at the stadium than Mourinho at Real

 

[Bianconero_Aus]

Lombardia is one of the richest regions in Europe no? And Piemonte ain’t too shabby either. Great and underrated region of Italy

 

[Hist]

Nothern Italy is rich as fuck. To say it’s not for rich people is ignorance at its finest.

iTS not a central hub city that attracts big capital like london or Paris.That's what I meant. I went too far in calling it shit obviously

 

[JCK]

iTS not a central hub city that attracts big capital like london or Paris.That's what I meant. I went too far in calling it shit obviously

So unusual of you.

 

[Hist]

So unusual of you.

You paragon of wisdom and self-control