joeyt Posted March 31, 2021 Share Posted March 31, 2021 Reveal hidden contents We're bottom of every table apart from one https://theathletic.com/2486308/2021/03/31/premier-league-fans-survey-results-best-run-clubs-worst-at-transfers-managers-futures/ Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
gjohnson Posted March 31, 2021 Share Posted March 31, 2021 On 31/03/2021 at 08:49, joeyt said: Reveal hidden contents We're bottom of every table apart from one https://theathletic.com/2486308/2021/03/31/premier-league-fans-survey-results-best-run-clubs-worst-at-transfers-managers-futures/ Expand Still beggars belief that 21% think our football is entertaining. Have to presume they are masochists, or stuck in torturous lives where watching 11 in black and white hide from a football is more entertaining than being beaten with sharp sticks Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest reefatoon Posted March 31, 2021 Share Posted March 31, 2021 On 31/03/2021 at 09:19, gjohnson said: Still beggars belief that 21% think our football is entertaining. Have to presume they are masochists, or stuck in torturous lives where watching 11 in black and white hide from a football is more entertaining than being beaten with sharp sticks Expand There is a certain breed of fan who won't say anything negative about the club. they feel they bleed black and white and have to stay loyal no matter what. Fucking idiots in other words. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ben Posted March 31, 2021 Share Posted March 31, 2021 On 31/03/2021 at 09:21, reefatoon said: There is a certain breed of fan who won't say anything negative about the club. they feel they bleed black and white and have to stay loyal no matter what. Fucking idiots in other words. Expand This is true, there was a program seller a few years ago that was totally supportive of anything the club did and protected/defended their every action, he's probably on furlough as Charnley's assistant by now. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Yorkie Posted March 31, 2021 Share Posted March 31, 2021 Still find that really surprising, especially in The Athletic where the comments section reflects this place a great deal. So for even the Chronicle to reveal that its readers are unanimous in their aversion to Bruce etc, I find it mystifying that it would be so different in The Athletic. Figures are iffy imo. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
gjohnson Posted March 31, 2021 Share Posted March 31, 2021 On 31/03/2021 at 10:05, Yorkie said: Still find that really surprising, especially in The Athletic where the comments section reflects this place a great deal. So for even the Chronicle to reveal that its readers are unanimous in their aversion to Bruce etc, I find it mystifying that it would be so different in The Athletic. Figures are iffy imo. Expand Not really....the Chronicle is free, while the Athletic has to be paid for. Different demographics amongst fans so some variation should be expected Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
joeyt Posted March 31, 2021 Share Posted March 31, 2021 How does paying for The Athletic make it for a higher percentage to be happy with Bruce/the club? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Yorkie Posted March 31, 2021 Share Posted March 31, 2021 On 31/03/2021 at 10:28, gjohnson said: Not really....the Chronicle is free, while the Athletic has to be paid for. Different demographics amongst fans so some variation should be expected Expand Don't see why that should make a difference tbh. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
gjohnson Posted March 31, 2021 Share Posted March 31, 2021 On 31/03/2021 at 10:31, Yorkie said: Don't see why that should make a difference tbh. Expand Well it shouldn't, but it does. As much as i don't want to be insulting i'd think that 60/70% of the fan base would not want to pay for an Athletic subscription. The ones that would be prepared to pay are more than likely better informed of the situation, and less susceptible to the 'support the team, not the regime' that seems to be prevalent amongst a large section of the match day going crowd. The ones that just go to 'get away from the missus, or a piss up day in town' are not likely to pay for any kind of serious analysis Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
gjohnson Posted March 31, 2021 Share Posted March 31, 2021 On 31/03/2021 at 10:30, joeyt said: How does paying for The Athletic make it for a higher percentage to be happy with Bruce/the club? Expand Older fans who have the means to pay and remember the truly grim times, and consider being in the top division the pinnacle of achievement Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
joeyt Posted March 31, 2021 Share Posted March 31, 2021 I think you're missing Yorkie's point. There's a higher percentage of people wanting Bruce out through The Chronicle than in The Atheltic Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wullie Posted March 31, 2021 Share Posted March 31, 2021 On 31/03/2021 at 10:43, gjohnson said: Older fans who have the means to pay and remember the truly grim times, and consider being in the top division the pinnacle of achievement Expand I very much doubt your EastStanders, grumpy old sods in their 60s, are paying for an Athletic subscription. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
gjohnson Posted March 31, 2021 Share Posted March 31, 2021 Don't think I am...the Athletic readership compared to the Chronicle is miniscule, and generalising it is likley to be the older more affluent crowd who can/will pay for the Athletic and seem to think that these last couple of seasons are good comparted to the late 80's Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Super Duper Branko Strupar Posted March 31, 2021 Share Posted March 31, 2021 On 31/03/2021 at 10:42, gjohnson said: Well it shouldn't, but it does. As much as i don't want to be insulting i'd think that 60/70% of the fan base would not want to pay for an Athletic subscription. The ones that would be prepared to pay are more than likely better informed of the situation, and less susceptible to the 'support the team, not the regime' that seems to be prevalent amongst a large section of the match day going crowd. The ones that just go to 'get away from the missus, or a piss up day in town' are not likely to pay for any kind of serious analysis Expand Proof of this? I'd be inclined to believe the opposite tbh. Those that are of the means and desire to pay for the more detailed and involved reporting of something like the Athletic would be more likely to be critical of this whole sham operation. Than those who only really read things from local papers all things NE and Newcastle more likely to be a bit more apologetic and dismissive. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Doctor Zaius Posted March 31, 2021 Share Posted March 31, 2021 On 31/03/2021 at 11:09, Super Duper Branko Strupar said: Proof of this? I'd be inclined to believe the opposite tbh. Those that are of the means and desire to pay for the more detailed and involved reporting of something like the Athletic would be more likely to be critical of this whole sham operation. Than those who only really read things from local papers all things NE and Newcastle more likely to be a bit more apologetic and dismissive. Expand Yeah, I'd agree with this. I think it would be more likely to be the other way around too. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
toon25 Posted March 31, 2021 Share Posted March 31, 2021 On 31/03/2021 at 10:49, gjohnson said: Don't think I am...the Athletic readership compared to the Chronicle is miniscule, and generalising it is likley to be the older more affluent crowd who can/will pay for the Athletic and seem to think that these last couple of seasons are good comparted to the late 80's Expand Struggle to believe this, like. How was The Athletic survey done? To be fair to the Chron, it was at the very least open to one and all to have a say. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
gjohnson Posted March 31, 2021 Share Posted March 31, 2021 On 31/03/2021 at 11:50, toon25 said: Struggle to believe this, like. How was The Athletic survey done? To be fair to the Chron, it was at the very least open to one and all to have a say. Expand Even if they conducted identical surveys, the Chronicle will have a far larger reader base than the Athletic just by the nature of being free. Don't get me wrong, I think the Athletic is probably one of the best collections of sporting journalism going, but compared to a free long established (disregarding quality) paper is always going to be more popular Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gonzosgone Posted March 31, 2021 Share Posted March 31, 2021 Looks like a flawed survey - minimum possible score of 20%. So they asked people to rate from 1-5 so if everyone scored us as a 1 (lowest) we would still score 20% Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Yorkie Posted March 31, 2021 Share Posted March 31, 2021 On 31/03/2021 at 12:23, Gonzosgone said: Looks like a flawed survey - minimum possible score of 20%. So they asked people to rate from 1-5 so if everyone scored us as a 1 (lowest) we would still score 20% Expand Ah. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Super Duper Branko Strupar Posted March 31, 2021 Share Posted March 31, 2021 (edited) If people were asked a range of 1-5 bad to good, and 20% of people thought it was being ran some variation of goodish+, then that means 20% of people likely answered 4 or 5. Its not everyone clicked 1 so its 20%. Thats not how they work Edited March 31, 2021 by Super Duper Branko Strupar Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
NEEJ Posted March 31, 2021 Share Posted March 31, 2021 (edited) On 31/03/2021 at 12:48, Super Duper Branko Strupar said: If people were asked a range of 1-5 bad to good, and 20% of people thought it was being ran some variation of goodish+, then that means 20% of people likely answered 4 or 5. Its not everyone clicked 1 so its 20%. Thats not how they work Expand They explained it as being the mean average of all respondents' scores converted into a score out of 100. It's a daft way to do it, like. Edited March 31, 2021 by NEEJ Because I wanted to edit it. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Super Duper Branko Strupar Posted March 31, 2021 Share Posted March 31, 2021 Really?! Then its worse than worthless then. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paully Posted March 31, 2021 Share Posted March 31, 2021 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
NEEJ Posted March 31, 2021 Share Posted March 31, 2021 On 31/03/2021 at 14:19, Paully said: Expand It's staggering to think that he's ended up getting two more jobs at a similar or higher level since. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Robster Posted March 31, 2021 Share Posted March 31, 2021 Two pictures of perfect health there. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts