What gets more 'bums on seats'?

[villa `cross the mersey]

Irrespective of how we have  played and what we have won, we have never filled Villa Park on a regular basis (in my life time - 1957 - date). Can`t see that changing ever - unless we whip out 10k seats !

[peter w]

short term - winning and signing a wow player

long term - realising that we aren't appealing to the local community and making the club theirs as much as the club belonged to the local communitites before it became predominately Asian.

[Quiet Lion]

It is a bit of both. I mean if we played boring football but won the league ala George Graham's Arsenal days we would all be happy.

If it is a choice between being boring and finishing 5th or being entertaining and finishing 7/8th, then it becomes more difficult.

Personally it is about winning for me, if we can win with style then all the better. 

I am struggling to think of a wow player that would seriously add to our gate. I mean Messi and the like aside.

When was the last time we signed a wow player ? Collymore ? Angel ? I doubt they seriously increased the gates. Sign a few of them and watch the results improve, and you would see and increase though.

[Gazza1982]

I think more affordable prices would really help. I remember a price cut against Wimbledon at home years ago and the attendance was 10k up on same fixture the year before. I don't go as much as I would like as I simply can't afford it.
All those empty seats at the grounds, if anyone at any club had any savy they should give away free tickets to say kids under 10 with a parent and get them interested in the game too.
Another important factor is that in the 70's and 80's kids didnt spend hours locked away in bedrooms online playing World of Warcraft or similar games. Home entertainment in general is far more sophisticated than what it was and football will suffer for that. Last time two of us went to Villa Park it cost well over £100, thats equivalent to a good meal out, a trip to the cinema and a taxi home.

[ez]

I think these days the two tend to go together. Those battling at the top are the teams with the most exciting players.

[Legion]

A bit of both.

[Ad@m]

Affordable tickets has to come first though, "beautiful football" on the radio is not quite the same.

I'm afraid to say that it doesn't.

Two equally ridiculous examples prove it:

Arsenal - about to charge people £100 for a standard ticket yet there is a waiting list of people trying to get in the ground on match days.

Sutton Coldifeld Town FC - my local club.  Tickets are extremely affordable yet they're grateful for 100 people through the turnstiles.

The reality is that success brings fans.  Look at the best supported clubs/teams in the world of any sport - generally (and there are always exceptions to the rule) they correlate with the most successful.  Sport is entertainment and people want to feel good when they watch sport.  You feel good when your team wins.  A good performance generally accompanies a success but it's secondary. 

It's fairly simple pyschology really.

[Blackcountry Villa]

A mix of winning and entertaining football. If you're winning every week but winning 1-0 you won't fill the ground, it may be a winning team but fans will be bored by the football on show. Under O'Neill we finished 6th but i was bored to tears in the process, i'd rather watch entertaining, exciting football. Some quality players would help aswell, Gabby is our best striker which says it all, a big name striker would get the crowds in.

[The Left Side]

Quick and neat passing on the break from players who value the club, if you don't believe that they can value the fans then have a look at Schalke or any other Bundesliga side and see the relationship between the club and the fans. We could learn a lot from them as their prices are around a third of the prices of the premier leagues, that is my two penneth!

[GullyFoyle]

Superglue!

[ROBBO]

Winning ugly will not improve attendances it might satisfy the hard core supporter but they will turn up anyway, it's turning the every so often supporter into a regular that gets gates up. If we sighned Messi this week what would the next home match attendance be? i reckon it would put 10.000 on the gate and if we start winning then a fair few will come back every home game. As someone previously said you have to be in a position where fans turn up because they are frightened of missing something.

[SashasGrandad]

Superglue!

Dehli belly?

[hawkeye]

 winning is not everything it is the only thing, there has to be an excitement about going to see a game and if you think there is a good chance we will lose then there is less optimism and comitment to go, there is a hard core that will turn up whateever but if you want to get crowds of 40 to 50 thousand consistantly then winning and the possibility of winning something is paramount

[Monty]

Winning, absolutely, but the problem with that is that no side really wins forever. Only Man Utd, Barcelona and Real Madrid can claim to practically uninterrupted success in the major leagues of Europe can claim pretty much constant success over the last decade - and I don't think people are about to call them unattractive sides to watch. Ultimately, I do think that, generally speaking, genuinely unattractive football can win you the odd trophy here and there, but the kind of sustained success that would genuinely affect attendances requires a kind of football that is necessarily good to watch - even Chelsea under Mourinho, or Inter under Mourinho, were capable of breathtaking football, great passing and interplay and all the rest of it. For genuine success, I don't think you can do it without good football.

[hawkeye]

agree Monty, you have to play good football, it can be argued that Chelsea play good football but its not entertaining in fact i think it is pretty dull, watching Arsenal is pleasing on the eye but exciting-nah - good football = successfull football but does not equate to exciting football