2010 MLS Attendance Analysis: Week 6

Discussion in 'MLS: News & Analysis' started by Andy_B, Apr 27, 2010.

  1. Andy_B

    Andy_B Member+

    Feb 2, 1999
    Nat'l Team:
    United States
    Code:
    % of season completed				
    15.4%				
    Year	Average	Median	%<10K	%>20k
    1996	25799	24850	12.5%	66.7%
    1997	16905	12774	29.2%	25.0%
    1998	15863	12939	10.3%	24.1%
    1999	14241	13697	37.9%	17.2%
    2000	13802	12952	27.6%	17.2%
    2001	14947	14823	16.7%	8.3%
    2002	17471	14127	9.5%	23.8%
    2003	15149	15827	21.7%	21.7%
    2004	16375	13811	26.1%	39.1%
    2005	15182	12548	24.1%	17.2%
    2006	17148	16904	13.8%	27.6%
    2007	14973	14130	13.3%	16.7%
    2008	15503	15412	15.6%	31.3%
    2009	14976	13634	17.6%	17.6%
    2010	17092	14843	13.5%	27.0%
    				
    Final Numbers				
    Year	Average	Median	%<10K	%>20k
    1996	17406	15093	21.9%	26.3%
    1997	14619	12733	25.0%	16.3%
    1998	14312	11871	26.6%	16.1%
    1999	14282	12973	32.3%	15.1%
    2000	13756	12690	34.4%	12.5%
    2001	14962	13431	26.6%	17.7%
    2002	15821	14108	17.1%	18.6%
    2003	14898	13641	23.3%	18.0%
    2004	15559	13285	24.7%	25.3%
    2005	15108	12619	27.1%	17.7%
    2006	15504	14175	18.8%	18.8%
    2007	16770	15353	8.2%	29.7%
    2008	16459	15188	11.0%	24.8%
    2009	16037	14686	14.7%	20.9%
    
     
    1 person likes this.
  2. Andy_B

    Andy_B Member+

    Feb 2, 1999
    Nat'l Team:
    United States
    AAQ after 15.4% of the season is completed


    Average: 4th out of 15
    Median: 5th out of 15
    <10k: 5th out of 15
    >20k: 5th out of 15

    AAQ = (4+5+5+5) = 4.75
     
  3. Kingston

    Kingston Member+

    Oct 6, 2005
    If I'm reading this correctly, the <10k (13.5%) is actually fifth behind 2002 (9.5%), 1998 (10.3%), 1996 (12.5%), and 2007 (13.3%).

    That would bump the AAQ up to 4.75.
     
  4. Andy_B

    Andy_B Member+

    Feb 2, 1999
    Nat'l Team:
    United States
    you are correct. I have corrected the AAQ post.
     
  5. BirdsonFire

    BirdsonFire Member

    May 9, 2008
    Club:
    Chicago Fire
    You should have your spreadsheet include ranks so that you don't have to keep doing that part by eyeballing it.
     
    1 person likes this.
  6. Andy_B

    Andy_B Member+

    Feb 2, 1999
    Nat'l Team:
    United States
    This is something I have wanted to add but never took the time to learn how.

    Can you send a pm if you know how I can do this in excel? Thanks
     
    1 person likes this.
  7. BirdsonFire

    BirdsonFire Member

    May 9, 2008
    Club:
    Chicago Fire
    Whoops.


    Next time I'll keep my mouth shut. :(
     
  8. BirdsonFire

    BirdsonFire Member

    May 9, 2008
    Club:
    Chicago Fire
    Andy,

    =rank(cell,cellalpha:cellomega)

    If something is the lowest number out of ten numbers, it will return a rank of 10.
     
  9. BirdsonFire

    BirdsonFire Member

    May 9, 2008
    Club:
    Chicago Fire
    this is a better:

    The syntax for the Rank function is:

    Rank( number, array, order )

    number is the number to find the rank for.

    array is a range or array of numbers to use for ranking purposes.

    order is optional. It specifies how to rank the numbers.

    If order is 0, it ranks numbers in descending order.
    If order is not 0, it ranks numbers in ascending order.

    If the order parameter is omitted, the Rank function assumes order is 0 (descending order).
     
    3 people repped this.
  10. Andy_B

    Andy_B Member+

    Feb 2, 1999
    Nat'l Team:
    United States
    that worked great! Thank you!

    I am going to be able to provide much more interesting AAQ numbers now I think as I can show AAQ for every year.
     
  11. Andy_B

    Andy_B Member+

    Feb 2, 1999
    Nat'l Team:
    United States
    Lets see what people think about this (thank BirdsOnFire!!)



    AAQ after 15.4% of games complete
    Code:
    Year	Average	Median	<10k	>20k	AAQ
    1996	1	1	3	1	1.50
    1997	5	14	14	6	9.75
    1998	7	13	2	7	7.25
    1999	14	10	15	11	12.50
    2000	15	12	13	11	12.75
    2001	13	6	8	15	10.50
    2002	2	8	1	8	4.75
    2003	10	3	10	9	8.00
    2004	6	9	12	2	7.25
    2005	9	15	11	11	11.50
    2006	3	2	6	4	3.75
    2007	12	7	4	14	9.25
    2008	8	4	7	3	5.50
    2009	11	11	9	10	10.25
    2010	4	5	5	5	4.75
    

    So looking at these numbers, 2010 is tied for the 3rd best AAQ ever after 15.4% of games played.
     
  12. cleazer

    cleazer Member+

    May 6, 2003
    Toledo, OH
    Club:
    Columbus Crew
    Nat'l Team:
    United States
    Does anyone have the team-by-team comparisons handy to post on here?
     
  13. BirdsonFire

    BirdsonFire Member

    May 9, 2008
    Club:
    Chicago Fire
    One thing I would love to see added is AAQ relative to the year in question. Meaning that year 1 is obviously AAQ 1, and year 2 could do no worse than AAQ 2.
     
  14. cleazer

    cleazer Member+

    May 6, 2003
    Toledo, OH
    Club:
    Columbus Crew
    Nat'l Team:
    United States
    All 8 of this week's games are on Saturday. That should help. Even the Saturday afternoon game, at DC, is part of a doubleheader, so the afternoon kickoff shouldn't be a problem.
     
  15. Andy_B

    Andy_B Member+

    Feb 2, 1999
    Nat'l Team:
    United States
    I am not sure I understand. Could you explain more?

    Isn't the equation always the same?

    Best AAQ possible always = 1
    Worst AAQ possible = the # of years that have been completed (this season would be 15)
     
  16. JasonMa

    JasonMa Member+

    Mar 20, 2000
    Arvada, CO
    Club:
    Colorado Rapids
    Nat'l Team:
    United States
    Andy I think he's asking for what the AAQ was at the end of that season. So at the end of 1996 the AAQ for 1996 was 1 (since there was only 1 season). At the end of 1997 the AAQ for 1996 was still 1 (every number in 1996 was better than the 1997 number) and the AAQ for 1997 was 2.
     
  17. BirdsonFire

    BirdsonFire Member

    May 9, 2008
    Club:
    Chicago Fire
    Sort of.

    I'm suggesting when looking at year given, that years given+1 thru current do not exist.


    Where as the typical AAQ looks at years 1 thru current for any given year.



    It's simply a different way of looking at how the league is doing attendance wise year to year.
     
  18. kenntomasch

    kenntomasch Member+

    Sep 2, 1999
    Out West
    Club:
    FC Tampa Bay Rowdies
    Nat'l Team:
    United States
    Here you go.
     
    2 people repped this.
  19. Andy_B

    Andy_B Member+

    Feb 2, 1999
    Nat'l Team:
    United States
    hmm, that is going to be a lot of number crunching.

    Also I am not sure what information can be gained from it? Isn't more interesting to see how the AAQ's stack up against all the years instead of just seeing AAQ from 1996-2000?
     
  20. CrewBeat

    CrewBeat Be Massive My Friends

    Jul 27, 2004
    Manhattan
    Club:
    Columbus Crew
    Nat'l Team:
    United States
    What he's asking for is just another column next to what you have, but for the ranges you're defining make the second half of the range not static and only through the current year.

    Rank( number, array, order )

    Where array would be $B$2:B2 for 1996 calcs
    Where array would be $B$2:B3 for 1997 calcs
    Where array would be $B$2:B4 for 1998 calcs
    ...

    you can just drag this formula down without retyping it each row. you should just need to modify the formula in the 1996 row then copy it to the other rows.
     
  21. BirdsonFire

    BirdsonFire Member

    May 9, 2008
    Club:
    Chicago Fire
    Yeah, I'm not sure that it's the greatest gain.


    More so another way to look at the way the league has been trending.
     
  22. BirdsonFire

    BirdsonFire Member

    May 9, 2008
    Club:
    Chicago Fire
    this is correct
     
  23. monster

    monster Member

    Oct 19, 1999
    Hanover, PA
    Club:
    DC United
    Nat'l Team:
    United States
  24. cleazer

    cleazer Member+

    May 6, 2003
    Toledo, OH
    Club:
    Columbus Crew
    Nat'l Team:
    United States
    wait a minute

    Are you seriously trying to tell me that 12 of the 15 returning teams are up over last year? That's incredible!
     
  25. Golazo

    Golazo Member+

    Apr 15, 1999
    Decatur, GA USA
    This is huge. Rep to BirdsOnFire. The AAQ was misleading in that (for example) you could be forgiven for assuming that a 4.75 meant that it was somewhere between the fourth and fifth best year so far. Having the additional column gives you true context.
     

Share This Page