Anyone else dissapointed at the crowd support?

jnizzy · Post #1 » by **jnizzy** » Thu Feb 23, 2012 11:57 pm

I've been a fan of the nets for a long time now and have been to A LOT of games and it just really upets me at the lack of support by our home crowd. There is absolutely no reason for having a better road record than a home record. I KNOW it's not an excuse for our players to blame the crowd, but seriously it's just pathetic sometimes. We have some great players(okay maybe just 2-3) so I HOPE moving to Brooklyn will excite some fans and that NJ will still support the Nets. That's it. I don't post often at all but I just felt the need to voice my opinion on this and see if anyone else feels the same way.

Jersey Generals · Post #2 » by **Jersey Generals** » Fri Feb 24, 2012 12:35 am

No. This team is **** moving. Hell, I barely want to go to a game in Newark, let alone just a random New Jersey person who only follows the Nets casually.

Post #3 » by **NyCeEvO** » Fri Feb 24, 2012 1:09 am

Yeah, NJ is just not a basketball state.

I thought that the having a mass transportation nearby would make a great difference (and maybe it would have if the Rock was there during the Kidd era) but it didn't.

Time to move...

jeff1624 · Post #4 » by **jeff1624** » Fri Feb 24, 2012 1:18 am

There's a reason why the team is moving to Brooklyn.

JoseRizal · Post #5 » by **JoseRizal** » Fri Feb 24, 2012 2:05 am

Screw NJ, we are Brooklyn-bound baby...

Shameer1016 · Post #6 » by **Shameer1016** » Fri Feb 24, 2012 2:23 am

I just think its the team and location. I've went to a couple Nets game in my life, all at "The Brick", and its not worth it to go see your team blown out. Its especially a pain for me to have to travel from Brooklyn to Newark to see something I could watch at home, and at least there I could change the channel. They should be able to get a better fan base IF there successful.

Post #7 » by **NyCeEvO** » Fri Feb 24, 2012 2:50 am

Shameer1016 wrote:I just think its the team and location. I've went to a couple Nets game in my life, all at "The Brick", and its not worth it to go see your team blown out. Its especially a pain for me to have to travel from Brooklyn to Newark to see something I could watch at home, and at least there I could change the channel. They should be able to get a better fan base IF there successful.

In 2001-2002 and 2002-2003, the NBA Finalist Nets had an average attendance of 13,806 and 13,760.

In 2001-2002, the Knicks were 30-52 but had an average attendance of 19,763 which ranked 4th in the league. The Knicks had a record of 37-45, but still maintained the 4th best attendance record at home and still averaged 19,763.

One area supports their team despite losing and the other does not support their team regardless of their record.

When the Nets move to Brooklyn, we'd have to look to the Clippers for a somewhat similar comparisons. Considering the Knicks' established roots and history in the area, the Knicks can be likened to the Lakers.

This year the Clippers have a higher average attendance record than the Lakers (18,997 and 18,873 respectively).

Last year, the Clippers averaged 17,742 and the Lakers averaged 18,997.

The season before Blake was drafted the Clippers average 16,170, while the Nets averaged 15,157 despite being 32-48.

Without a star, the Clippers still have a solid fan base but once they officially got one they got CP3, they surpassed the Lakers as the team to watch in the area.

If we immediately come in with a Big 3 of our own, I'd expect to see a big contigent of casual NY fans coming to see the games along with many of the old diehard New Jersey fans.

As you said, the key is starting off with a bang.

Shameer1016 · Post #8 » by **Shameer1016** » Fri Feb 24, 2012 3:03 am

Agreed with everything you said. And I think the reason that 32 win Nets team crowd so so big, was because we had Carter, and a All-Star in Devin Harris at the time. There were fun to watch, I really enjoyed that season, not knowing that it would be the last the time the Nets had any shot at the playoffs

Jersey Generals · Post #9 » by **Jersey Generals** » Fri Feb 24, 2012 3:13 am

The problem is and always will be that there is no city center within New Jersey. Literally, within the entire state of New Jersey, there is nowhere for a team to take root and have a large enough population within the city they play to support the team. Why do you think there isn't a baseball team in NJ? It's not all because of the Yankees or Mets, though that obviously does play a part. There were countless of teams like the Expos, the Rays, and the Marlins, who wanted to/looked into moving to NJ, but there is nowhere to build a stadium that New Jersey fans will travel to in order to watch the game and also have a city to be able to support.

Newark has a population of less than 300,000, and that's the state's largest city and it would be nearly a million people below the next smallest city population in the NBA. When nearly half of the potential fans are potentially fans of another team within twenty minutes of their home, a la the Knicks, it's hard to build a support base. And that is and always will be the problem with New Jersey. Philadelphia and New York are just too close.

Shameer1016 · Post #10 » by **Shameer1016** » Fri Feb 24, 2012 3:44 am

I mean, if we were to go by that logic, wouldn't it still be hard to form a better fan base if they moved to NY? Knicks may not be a good team, but there history is in NY and they have some of the best fans, that pay what ever price to watch them play. Bandwagon fans and the younger generation might be the only fan base the Nets get

DarkXaero · Post #11 » by **DarkXaero** » Fri Feb 24, 2012 3:54 am

Don't underestimate the winning part of it.

Jersey Generals · Post #12 » by **Jersey Generals** » Fri Feb 24, 2012 3:56 am

No, because Brooklyn has a two million population for that borough alone. When a stadium only houses 20,000 people, a population of 300,000 would have to have 6.66 percent of the people support it for a sellout. Whereas in Brooklyn, only 1 percent of the population has to support it for a sellout. Which sounds easier for casual fans? 2,000,000 of them or 300,000 of them?

Shameer1016 · Post #13 » by **Shameer1016** » Fri Feb 24, 2012 4:03 am

2,000,000? not bad. Too bad most of them are like me and get pissed of easily when we have to waste our money :lol:

. I hope they really thrive in Brooklyn, but its not going to be easy. And I'm not underestimating the winning part, its just that unless I see more quality players here, I'm not goign to jump the gun and start thinking about the winning aspect.

Jersey Generals · Post #14 » by **Jersey Generals** » Fri Feb 24, 2012 4:18 am

I actually think it's more than just a flat 2,000,000. Something closer to 2.5 million, if I recall. Meaning...I estimated their population down more than the entirety of Newark has.

Shameer1016 · Post #15 » by **Shameer1016** » Fri Feb 24, 2012 4:29 am

Jersey Generals wrote:I actually think it's more than just a flat 2,000,000. Something closer to 2.5 million, if I recall. Meaning...I estimated their population down more than the entirety of Newark has.

Yea I recall it being something like 2.5 Million, a lot of people in a small *** borough. I love it though, can't wait til they move here, only 20 minutes away from my house.

Post #16 » by **NyCeEvO** » Fri Feb 24, 2012 7:07 am

Shameer1016 wrote:
Jersey Generals wrote:I actually think it's more than just a flat 2,000,000. Something closer to 2.5 million, if I recall. Meaning...I estimated their population down more than the entirety of Newark has.

Yea I recall it being something like 2.5 Million, a lot of people in a small *** borough. I love it though, can't wait til they move here, only 20 minutes away from my house.

The best part is that it's not just Brooklynites that we'd attract. We'll get fans from all boroughs including Long Islanders.

Aussie 2point0 · Post #17 » by **Aussie 2point0** » Fri Feb 24, 2012 9:27 am

NyCeEvO wrote:Yeah, NJ is just not a basketball state.

I thought that the having a mass transportation nearby would make a great difference (and maybe it would have if the Rock was there during the Kidd era) but it didn't.

Time to move...

That's what I don't get.... Plenty of good to great players were born, raised or come out of Jersey... Trenton and Patterson come to mind.... Yet no one really follows pro ball in Jersey? But mostly I think the issue is cultral.... This Franchise is cursed.... Thanks to the inept GM Willis Reed and owners being tight as a fishes @r$e hole.... My Aussie Rules team plays its home games 40 kilometres (approx 60 miles) away but we travel to watch the games... Granted I can catch a train to and from the venue and walk no more than a mile all up... But's it's what we where raised on....

But the most important thing that other posters have been saying is No talent means no fans which means no income.

I have google mapped both the rock and the izod arena's. I can tell you now you couldn't pay me enough money to try and make a game at Izod... But the rock was easy and the nets should of gone there earlier. I get that there where contract issues with leasing the Izod... But when your core business strength is talent + easy access to the venue + fans = $$$$$$$$ then you don't have to be a rocket surgeon to realise your on a hiding to nothing...

newjerseyfan · Post #18 » by **newjerseyfan** » Fri Feb 24, 2012 3:18 pm

The reality is it's a game of density. If you look around the league most teams are supported by cities NOT by states. That is, they are named and located after a city because of the density of the city. This isn't football where there are 8 home games in the regular season. Or is it baseball with huge stadiums, cheap ticket prices, and is more a family event to just drink and kick back. You have 41 home games (3 pre-season as well). No one is going to drive 45mins+ on a regular basis (especially a weekday) just to see a game. The arena needs to be located in a big city with high concentration.

Here are the quick stats (first number is population, second is people per sq mi):

Chicago = 2.7M and 11,864 / sq mi
Los Angeles = 3.8M and 8,092 / sq mi
Boston = 0.6M and 12,752 / sq mi
Dallas = 1.2M and 3,518 / sq mi
Miami = 0.4M and 12,139 / sq mi

Now there's a few things to factor in --- one is clearly population and the other is just the area. For example, people are more comfortable driving in Miami and Los Angeles and Dallas. This sounds stupid, but it's true --- it's warmer and nicer. People are used to it. I lived in California for a long time and I drove everywhere (barring LA traffic). In the New England area, with snow, rain etc... the experience is a lot worse.

Add to that just not a great Basketball legacy and it gets pretty tough. The one thing that will be tough is stealing Knicks fans in Brooklyn. They need to go in as winners so the casual fans convert hard.

Post #19 » by **jerseyjac** » Sat Feb 25, 2012 5:49 am

Jersey Generals wrote:The problem is and always will be that there is no city center within New Jersey. Literally, within the entire state of New Jersey, there is nowhere for a team to take root and have a large enough population within the city they play to support the team. Why do you think there isn't a baseball team in NJ? It's not all because of the Yankees or Mets, though that obviously does play a part. There were countless of teams like the Expos, the Rays, and the Marlins, who wanted to/looked into moving to NJ, but there is nowhere to build a stadium that New Jersey fans will travel to in order to watch the game and also have a city to be able to support.

Newark has a population of less than 300,000, and that's the state's largest city and it would be nearly a million people below the next smallest city population in the NBA. When nearly half of the potential fans are potentially fans of another team within twenty minutes of their home, a la the Knicks, it's hard to build a support base. And that is and always will be the problem with New Jersey. Philadelphia and New York are just too close.

Well said...

Post #20 » by **jerseyjac** » Sat Feb 25, 2012 6:47 am

Bottom line, its the product on the floor...our numbers in NJ have never been through the roof, even during the Kidd years, but you have to remember its all about the die hard fan...

To have die hard fans you need to have a consistent product...you know our franchise history...

I would say the Nets die hard fan has always been more of a cult following...we may have picked up a few more fans through the Kidd years, but as I have always said, there are more Knick and Sixer fans than Nets fans in the State of New Jersey...

I really don't believe The Rock/Newark have been given enough time to show what they can get done there...It has nothing to with do with Jersey NOT being a basketball state...Even with some of the promos the Nets have done this year trying to slash ticket prices, the avg. basketball fan isn't interested in going to a game...

(side note: HDTV and the increasing TV population that is getting to view a basketball game in HD doesn't help...)

I do think there is validity to the smaller city population of Newark, but over time if the product on the floor is attractive to watch in person ticket sales will only go up...you are only going to sell so many tickets to fans who are more interested in watching the opposition...

I truly believe this organization has always deserved better support and Brooklyn will provide that...I'm extremely anxious to finally see the Nets fans base grow via Brooklyn and ultimately put real fans in those seats...

However, with that said, how much of a difference can a new identity make...The Rock/Newark should at least be in the mix of a potential expansion franchise destination for the NBA...that is if the Devils/Prudential Center can find investors and financial backing when the Nets are gone...Its not going to be easy surviving on hockey/college basketball/WNBA + concerts/other...