Iowa Wild: Social Media Analysis

Aaron Broege, Taylor Brooks, Kate Moriarty

Overview

Project Preview

Methodology

Facebook Analysis

Twitter Analysis

Observations and Suggestions

Conclusion
Project Preview

Social Media Platforms

Facebook, Twitter

Points of Focus

Content

Post type

Game outcome
Methodology

Post Logging

Content

Post

Traffic

Analysis

Totals

Averages
Facebook Analysis
● Total Followers on page 45,934 ● Total likes on page 46,707

Likes/ Reactions Average Comments

Total Posts 58.25 2.44

Blog 42.69 0.95

Graphic 65.62 2.87

Promotional Events 29.16 2.33

Videos 60.86 2.46

Facebook Fan Interaction
Facebook Accountability
Traffic Accountability
Facebook Trends

Graphics get more likes

Pictures that trigger emotion get more likes

Twitter Analysis

Player Tweets Opponent Tweets

● Player Updates In-Game ● Opponent Updates In-Game
● Player Goal ● Opponent Goals

Team Tweets Organization Tweets

● Puck Drop ● Web Stream
● Team Updates In-Game ● Intermission Gifs/Pictures
● Score Update ● Pregame Pictures
● Wild Starters ● Organization Promotions
Twitter Analysis

Tweets Retweets Favorites

Total 857 520 4048

Player 243 167 1187

Team 380 216 1854

Opponent 194 34 236

Organization 23 20 194

Fights 17 17 144
Twitter Fan Interaction
Gameday Averages by Type of Tweet

Number of Posts Retweets Likes

Player Tweets 10.125 6.96 49.46

Team Tweets 15.83 9 77.25

Opponent Tweets 8.08 1.42 9.83

Organization Tweets .96 .83 8.08

Fights .708 .708 6

Twitter Trends

● Opponent Tweet accountability vs. traffic accountability

● Team posts are most successful
● Home vs. Away games
○ No correlation
● Loses by two or more
○ 221 views compared to 269
● Ladies’ Night was an outlier
○ October 20th, 3-2 home win
○ Total traffic: 554
● No posts about sponsors in-game
In Conclusion

● Analyzed content and types of posts

● Wins and losses do not dictate traffic

● Twitter is more effective

● Team Tweets create most buzz

● Recommend in-game sponsorship posts