The Fans in the stands, or lack thereof. Stats

[zow2]

It would not have made a difference last night, not when the Chiefs ran at will like that.

 

But interesting to note that teams with fans in the stands are 22-11 while teams with no fans are 25-30-1.  That's a .666 winning % with fans vs .454 % without fans.   I dunno, but that seems like a competitive advantage.  

 

It could be simply that the better teams are playing with some fans... or some other factors.  It felt like it made a difference at Tennessee.  Just throwing it out there.

 

 

 

 

 

[buffalonian]

It seems ridiculous to allow fans at some games and not at others.  Is there any other league in the world right now that is handling the fan situation the same way?  I can't think of one.  And it seems obvious to me that at least to some extent, home teams gain some advantage by having even a minimal number of fans.  

[Mrbojanglezs]

Is what it is, no point in discussing it as all its going to lead to is politics.

Edited October 21, 2020 by Mrbojanglezs

[Careca]

5 minutes ago, Mrbojanglezs said:

Is what is is, no point in discussing it as all its going to lead to is politics.

It is correct, but it is impolite to discuss because some people might get upset?

 

I guess that makes sense, why speak about unfair things if it may make people unhappy?

[ohboychoboy]

On 10/20/2020 at 8:13 AM, buffalonian said:

It seems ridiculous to allow fans at some games and not at others.  Is there any other league in the world right now that is handling the fan situation the same way?  I can't think of one.  And it seems obvious to me that at least to some extent, home teams gain some advantage by having even a minimal number of fans.  

 

There's a very simple reason.  All NFL teams are subject to the rules and regulations of their local or state governments.  So if you were going to make a league-wide standard, the NFL would have to default to the lowest common denominator, that being 0 fans, as that's the mandate of the California and NY State governments, i.e., no spectators at sporting events.  Therefore, the NFL owners would be deferring all decisions on attendance to the governors of those states. 

Edited October 21, 2020 by Hapless Bills Fan
politics

[SCBills]

1 hour ago, zow2 said:

It would not have made a difference last night, not when the Chiefs ran at will like that.

 

But interesting to note that teams with fans in the stands are 22-11 while teams with no fans are 25-30-1.  That's a .666 winning % with fans vs .454 % without fans.   I dunno, but that seems like a competitive advantage.  

 

It could be simply that the better teams are playing with some fans... or some other factors.  It felt like it made a difference at Tennessee.  Just throwing it out there.

 

 

 

 

 

I think there is absolutely some “there” there. 

[buffalonian]

On 10/20/2020 at 9:06 AM, ohboychoboy said:

 

There's a very simple reason.  All NFL teams are subject to the rules and regulations of their local or state governments.  So if you were going to make a league-wide standard, the NFL would have to default to the lowest common denominator, that being 0 fans, as that's the mandate of the California and NY State governments, i.e., no spectators at sporting events.  Therefore, the NFL owners would be deferring all decisions on attendance to the governors of those states. 

The decision doesn’t have to involve the Governor of any state. The NBA, MLB, NHL, Premier League, etc all decided to have a blanket rule of no fans at any games. They made this decision because they believed it to be the safest and fairest policy.  The NFL is more concerned about the extra revenue from having some fans at some games. 

[mannc]

14 minutes ago, buffalonian said:

The decision doesn’t have to involve the Governor of any state. The NBA, MLB, NHL, Premier League, etc all decided to have a blanket rule of no fans at any games. They made this decision because they believed it to be the safest and fairest policy.  The NFL is more concerned about the extra revenue from having some fans at some games. 

Why should fans in Florida or Tennessee or KC who want to attend their teams’ games be punished for decisions made by the governors of California or NY?

[Nextmanup]

On 10/20/2020 at 8:48 AM, zow2 said:

It would not have made a difference last night, not when the Chiefs ran at will like that.

 

But interesting to note that teams with fans in the stands are 22-11 while teams with no fans are 25-30-1.  That's a .666 winning % with fans vs .454 % without fans.   I dunno, but that seems like a competitive advantage.  

 

It could be simply that the better teams are playing with some fans... or some other factors.  It felt like it made a difference at Tennessee.  Just throwing it out there.

 

 

 

 

 

I'd like to see all the matchups and evaluate them one by one to see if there might be other factors at play.

 

For example, what is the breakdown of record among those teams?  Point differential?  

 

How did turnovers factor into the games in question?

 

If you analyzed it long enough and concluded there really likely was some benefit to the home crowd, I would find it interesting.

 

By the way: these 2 groups (.666% vs .454%)...are they comprised solely of home teams?

 

Obviously away teams aren't going to have fans in the stands. I assume they are only looking at home teams and then comparing those with fans to those without.

 

 

[NoHuddleKelly12]

This thread has PPP potential. 

[scribo]

That was the lowest attendance the Bills have ever had for a home primetime game. We need to do better.

[SlimShady'sSpaceForce]

On 10/20/2020 at 8:48 AM, zow2 said:

It would not have made a difference last night, not when the Chiefs ran at will like that.

 

But interesting to note that teams with fans in the stands are 22-11 while teams with no fans are 25-30-1.  That's a .666 winning % with fans vs .454 % without fans.   I dunno, but that seems like a competitive advantage.  

 

It could be simply that the better teams are playing with some fans... or some other factors.  It felt like it made a difference at Tennessee.  Just throwing it out there.

 

 

 

Some stats have meaning and stats are useless.  

 

I think you know which I think this one is.  

 

17 minutes ago, NoHuddleKelly12 said:

This thread has PPP potential. 

 

Poorly Prepared Plan?  

[RiotAct]

I think everyone involved is doing a great job.

[Hapless Bills Fan]

41 minutes ago, mannc said:

Why should fans in Florida or Tennessee or KC who want to attend their teams’ games be punished for decisions made by the governors of California or NY?

 

A fair league decision to provide a uniform competitive environment across the league.  As noted NBA, MLB, NHL, Premier League, etc all decided to have a blanket rule of no fans at any games.  It was fairest.

[4_kidd_4]

they terk err fernss!! 

[machine gun kelly]

Moving on.  No more political stuff please.  Such a waste of breath.

[zow2]

Tony Dungy was on radio this morning.  He said he's been to a few college games...and the one's with fans, even with limited capacity have a surprising amount of energy.  He thinks it makes a difference.  But i don't know about NFL and how that translates.

[buffalonian]

34 minutes ago, machine gun kelly said:

Moving on.  No more political stuff please.  Such a waste of breath.

It’s not a political topic.  The question is really about whether the Bills are at disadvantage because the league does not have a uniform policy on fan attendance like other professional sports leagues.  

[mannc]

1 hour ago, Hapless Bills Fan said:

 

A fair league decision to provide a uniform competitive environment across the league.  As noted NBA, MLB, NHL, Premier League, etc all decided to have a blanket rule of no fans at any games.  It was fairest.

I think this is an important topic and I would like to engage further, but I am afraid whatever I say here is going to provoke the mods’ wrath...

[JoPoy88]

29 minutes ago, mannc said:

I think this is an important topic and I would like to engage further, but I am afraid whatever I say here is going to provoke the mods’ wrath...

Why would it? There’s nothing more to say about it except yes, the OP is right there is an advantage and no, the league will not address it because it’s no longer in their control because they passed the buck before the season started. The league is the bad guy here as Hap said. No need to wallow around in political dirt this time around.

[Hapless Bills Fan]

39 minutes ago, mannc said:

I think this is an important topic and I would like to engage further, but I am afraid whatever I say here is going to provoke the mods’ wrath...

 

I don't have bandwidth if everyone tries it, but you can always hit one of us in PM and ask.  Probably better speak for myself, hit me

[RyanC883]

5 hours ago, buffalonian said:

The decision doesn’t have to involve the Governor of any state. The NBA, MLB, NHL, Premier League, etc all decided to have a blanket rule of no fans at any games. They made this decision because they believed it to be the safest and fairest policy.  The NFL is more concerned about the extra revenue from having some fans at some games. 

 

MLB has fans now

[Over 29 years of fanhood]

On 10/20/2020 at 9:33 AM, Mrbojanglezs said:

Is what it is, no point in discussing it as all its going to lead to is politics.

doesn’t have to. Say the fact that isn’t changing is; some municipalities allow fans, some don’t across the NFL. 
 

what could be done to make sure the reality is fair to the competitive landscape?

 

Reasonable apolitical question very pertinent to the game. 

[Hapless Bills Fan]

9 minutes ago, Over 29 years of fanhood said:

doesn’t have to. Say the fact that isn’t changing is; some municipalities allow fans, some don’t across the NFL. 
 

what could be done to make sure the reality is fair to the competitive landscape?

 

Reasonable apolitical question very pertinent to the game. 

 

It seems to me the only fair thing to do is to go to the lowest denominator

If one state won't allow fans, no fans anywhere

 

But the NFL has already thrown down it will leave it to local rules.  I don't think it's fair, but it Is what it Is

 

3 hours ago, RyanC883 said:

 

MLB has fans now

 

It's down to a couple locations, though, right?  It's not like 32 locations all over the country?

[Rc2catch]

Leave the states and government out of it. This should be a league issue. 
The league should be the ones saying either all teams have fans or NO teams have fans. 
These owners are all in the same boat, they’re all losing profits from ticket sales. I 100% think it’s a competitive advantage. I 100% think it has effects on players. 
The league should of jumped in right from the start and said we are all in this together. All or nothing. 
It’s too late now to change things as they are already dealing with enough. Just not sure how some owners signed off on this 

Edited October 22, 2020 by Rc2catch

[Mr. WEO]

XFL type crowds=zero point zero impact.

3 hours ago, RyanC883 said:

 

MLB has fans now

 

 

name one

[LABILLBACKER]

Sure wish they could sneak in 15,000 for the NE game. Unfortunately with NY numbers rising some it's probably not happening. 

[LABILLBACKER]

6 hours ago, mannc said:

I think this is an important topic and I would like to engage further, but I am afraid whatever I say here is going to provoke the mods’ wrath...

I feel your pain. I don't even know what words to use without getting another demerit. Probably should move this thread,  right?

[Albany,n.y.]

55 minutes ago, Mr. WEO said:

XFL type crowds=zero point zero impact.

  4 hours ago, RyanC883 said:

 

MLB has fans now

 

name one

World Series:https://www.sportingnews.com/us/mlb/news/world-series-2020-location-texas-globe-life-field/134iv8q772gwi16omsl7r5d347#:~:text=Are fans allowed at the,capacity to peak at 11%2C500.

Are fans allowed at the World Series?

Major League Baseball has allowed fans at Globe Life Park for both the NLCS and now for the World Series. They're allowing capacity to peak at 11,500. The new ballpark can hold approximately 40,300, so that allows fans to be scattered throughout seats at about a quarter of capacity.

Tickets for the World Series were solid in pods of four for the purposes of social distancing. Most secondary ticket sale sites offered tickets in pairs. The ballpark is also filled with hand sanitizing stations and signs with reminders about masks and social distancing. 

[Gordio]

9 hours ago, Hapless Bills Fan said:

 

It seems to me the only fair thing to do is to go to the lowest denominator

If one state won't allow fans, no fans anywhere

 

But the NFL has already thrown down it will leave it to local rules.  I don't think it's fair, but it Is what it Is

 

 

It's down to a couple locations, though, right?  It's not like 32 locations all over the country?

 

 

Life is not fair.  Like the one poster said why punish the people in florida/tenn/texas because they don't live under stricter guidelines set by the Governor.  

 

BTW, Manfred said last night before the rays/dodgers game that baseball isn't sustainable without the fans.  Said teams loss over 2 billion due to no fans.  Hockey has said they will not start the season unless there is a guaranty fans will be allowed.  Sports will fold as we know it if this continues well into next year.

 

Edited October 22, 2020 by Gordio

[DaggersEOD]

9 hours ago, Rc2catch said:

Leave the states and government out of it. This should be a league issue. 
The league should be the ones saying either all teams have fans or NO teams have fans. 
These owners are all in the same boat, they’re all losing profits from ticket sales. I 100% think it’s a competitive advantage. I 100% think it has effects on players. 
The league should of jumped in right from the start and said we are all in this together. All or nothing. 
It’s too late now to change things as they are already dealing with enough. Just not sure how some owners signed off on this 

 

See I’m of the opposite mind. Instead of defaulting to the lowest common denominator we should be aiming for the eventual goal, normal stadium attendance. 
 

If stadiums continue to increase attendance, it’s progress. Limiting or adding new restrictions on attendance is regression. 
 

The NFL should allow the maximum amount of fans per the local directive. 
 

They don’t handicap franchises with no state income tax, how is this different?

[Hapless Bills Fan]

1 hour ago, DaggersEOD said:

See I’m of the opposite mind. Instead of defaulting to the lowest common denominator we should be aiming for the eventual goal, normal stadium attendance. 
If stadiums continue to increase attendance, it’s progress. Limiting or adding new restrictions on attendance is regression. 
The NFL should allow the maximum amount of fans per the local directive. 
 

They don’t handicap franchises with no state income tax, how is this different?

 

Fair question and actually reasonable analogy.

 

I would say fans in the stands (or not) can very directly impact the quality of play on the field at gametime thus the parity of competition across the league.

 

Some have actually proposed that franchises in states with income tax should have their salary cap adjusted to account for this, and struck me as a reasonable change.  But as it stands, certainly there can be seen to be a disadvantage in attracting and paying for premium FA who have their choice of teams, so the competitive disadvantage is probably real.  But of course other factors enter into those FA decisions as well (quality of the team, coaching, facilities, location).  And it doesn't affect where players on their rookie contract, players claimed on waivers, or UDFA just trying to make a team wind up.  So the effect on competitive advantage is more distant and less direct.

[Livinginthepast]

The NFL allowed itself to be bullied by its more greedy owners to allow teams to decide on fans. It should be a blanket no fans policy to keep it fair and obviously to keep people safe. What they have done is unfair and idiotic.

 

I am more interested overall on the effect of no fans in the stadiums on the quality of the games themselves. Do certain teams do better than they would have with no noise? Do certain players perform better with no fans watching (even if they are home fans?).  Do the refs behave differently with calls if there is no fan pressure? This whole year is unique opportunity for sports psychologists to study all these different things. Hopefully we will never see another year like it ever again! 

[RyanC883]

11 hours ago, Hapless Bills Fan said:

 

It seems to me the only fair thing to do is to go to the lowest denominator

If one state won't allow fans, no fans anywhere

 

But the NFL has already thrown down it will leave it to local rules.  I don't think it's fair, but it Is what it Is

 

 

It's down to a couple locations, though, right?  It's not like 32 locations all over the country?

 

true/good point.  

 

  but overall, many businesses operate under different state laws.  this really is not that different.  we currently have a disadvantage (perhaps) because of no fans in stands.  but when things open up again, we will have a huge advantage with our fans.  in the meantime, we have fans at away games still.   I’m fine with the NFL’s approach.  

11 hours ago, Mr. WEO said:

XFL type crowds=zero point zero impact.

 

 

name one

 

The World Series has fans.  So did NLDS and ALCS.  True, in a bubble, but still fans.  

[DabillsDaBillsDaBills]

2 hours ago, Gordio said:

 

 

Life is not fair.  Like the one poster said why punish the people in florida/tenn/texas because they don't live under stricter guidelines set by the Governor.  

 

BTW, Manfred said last night before the rays/dodgers game that baseball isn't sustainable without the fans.  Said teams loss over 2 billion due to no fans.  Hockey has said they will not start the season unless there is a guaranty fans will be allowed.  Sports will fold as we know it if this continues well into next year.

 

 

Why punish the people in florida/tenn/texas because they don't live under stricter guidelines set by the Governor?

 

Well, like you said, life is not fair 😄

 

 

[Rc2catch]

2 hours ago, DaggersEOD said:

 

See I’m of the opposite mind. Instead of defaulting to the lowest common denominator we should be aiming for the eventual goal, normal stadium attendance. 
 

If stadiums continue to increase attendance, it’s progress. Limiting or adding new restrictions on attendance is regression. 
 

The NFL should allow the maximum amount of fans per the local directive. 
 

They don’t handicap franchises with no state income tax, how is this different?

I see it as a competitive advantage. 
The goal should 100% be having fans in the stands but that’s just not gonna happen for a bit. Right now, today, there is nothing that could be done. If they were going to take action and decide my philosophy of if everyone can’t have fans at games nobody can they would of had to have acted before the season started. It would of been something the owners needed to agree on. 

Having fans even in the smaller number is an effect on gameplay and an advantage to those who can have them imo. Where as state income tax may have effect on talent acquired it’s not changing how a defense may play in the 3rd quarter when they desperately need a stop. Just my two cents.

I would like to see fans allowed for everyone. Rather limited capacity or whatever. 
 

[MJS]

I think it is clear now that defenses thrive on the noise and electricity that fans bring, including our defense. Hope we can get them back soon because it may be one of the missing ingredients to our defense.

[SCBills]

1 hour ago, RyanC883 said:

 

true/good point.  

 

  but overall, many businesses operate under different state laws.  this really is not that different.  we currently have a disadvantage (perhaps) because of no fans in stands.  but when things open up again, we will have a huge advantage with our fans.  in the meantime, we have fans at away games still.   I’m fine with the NFL’s approach.  

 

The World Series has fans.  So did NLDS and ALCS.  True, in a bubble, but still fans.  

NLDS had fans because it was in Texas. 
 

ALCS did not have fans because it was in Cali. 
 

Thankfully they are holding the World Series in a state that allows fans. 

[DaggersEOD]

On 10/22/2020 at 9:27 AM, Hapless Bills Fan said:

 

Fair question and actually reasonable analogy.

 

I would say fans in the stands (or not) can very directly impact the quality of play on the field at gametime thus the parity of competition across the league.

 

Some have actually proposed that franchises in states with income tax should have their salary cap adjusted to account for this, and struck me as a reasonable change.  But as it stands, certainly there can be seen to be a disadvantage in attracting and paying for premium FA who have their choice of teams, so the competitive disadvantage is probably real.  But of course other factors enter into those FA decisions as well (quality of the team, coaching, facilities, location).  And it doesn't affect where players on their rookie contract, players claimed on waivers, or UDFA just trying to make a team wind up.  So the effect on competitive advantage is more distant and less direct.

 

As a fan of a team in the highest taxed state, I also hate it when we're competing against the Fins for talent against zero income taxes. Completely agree with that point.  It sucks but it's still something that has been tolerated for as long as there has been an NFL (Ok, I wasn't around that long so I may be assuming lol)

 

That said, these teams have proven to not be static.  Many teams have moved throughout the history of the NFL and others were created.  A MAJOR decision factor must include taxes and business climate.  States/governments are businesses too (for those who don't get into local politics) who's #1 job is attracting residents and businesses.

 

I don't know if it's wise to disturb the current set up.  I mean, why just stop at 0% income and Not 0% income.  Should all states and teams have a sliding scale of cap as it relates to the various income taxes?  What taxes should be included and how would they be weighted?  Is income tax more important than sales/property taxes (which are usually a lot higher in no income tax states)?

 

Once you try to meld professional sports with political/tax climate, you're opening yourself up to a TON of risks downstream.

 

So this as well as the stadium attendance should be left to the locals not the NFL IMO.

[Einstein's Dog]

I was wondering if it might be possible for the Bills to designate a different place for their home playoff game, like in FL.

 

They could distribute the tickets through the season ticket holders first and that would get the crowd pro-Bills.  They have allowed teams to use other stadiums before.  I would rather have a pro Bills crowd than the cold weather.