Last week we presented our ranking of NFL fan bases. The Cowboys, Patriots, Jets and Saints headed this list, and every other city in America let us know that our study was garbage. As in any study of this nature, there will always be limitations that leave room for debate.
One such source of debate is in how much data we use for assessing fan equity. We use 11 years of data to develop a model for forecasting expected consumer demand (the forecast is based on winning percentage, pricing, stadium capacity, metro area population, metro area median income and other factors). We then determined fan equity (fan loyalty and support) by comparing the model forecasts to each team’s last three years of results.
One important question is whether three years is sufficient. In our minds three years is a compromise. An argument in favor of a lengthier time horizon is that fan loyalty is a persistent trait that moves slowly. If this is the case, it might make sense to look at relative performance for the last five or ten years of data. On the other hand, the world is constantly changing and evolving so it also makes sense to focus on recent history. In the case of sports, if championships and post season success are the sources of long-term fan equity then using a shorter horizon that is sensitive to near term changes makes sense.
The top five for the last the last decade would be New England, Washington, Kansas City, Denver and Pittsburgh. This list will likely make other fans happy but it will still result in significant unhappiness in Green Bay. Later this week we will discuss in more depth why some of the teams that conventional wisdom would suggest to be at the top of our list fell short.
We can also look at who is rising and who is falling. For this analysis we compare the fan equity rankings using the first 3 years of the data (2002 to 2005) with the last three years (2010 to 2012). The analysis finds that the biggest risers were the Cowboys, Jets and Colts. The four biggest drops were the Chiefs, Buccaneers, Rams and Redskins. This list shows both the pros and cons of using short versus long horizons. The short horizon allows us to capture the long-term impact of what Peyton Manning delivered the Colts and the importance of the Cowboys’ new stadium. On the negative side, the early success of the Rams and the Bucs seems to have turned out to be short lived.
There is one other element of the preceding list of teams that have suffered a decline in fan equity that may raise some eyebrows. Two of the teams that suffered dramatic drops have Native American oriented team names: The Chiefs and the Redskins. Over the last decade we have witnessed an increase in efforts to eliminate Native American team names and mascots. Lewis is an Illinois grad and Tripathi is a Redskins fan so they know firsthand how a mascot controversy can split a fan base. There are, of course, alternative explanations for why these two teams’ fan equity has decreased (but keep in mind that we do control for team performance) but it is at least noteworthy that two of the four teams with the biggest drops have controversial team names.
Mike Lewis & Manish Tripathi, Emory University 2013.