Jump to content
IGNORED

Brentford


formerly known as ivan

Recommended Posts

2 minutes ago, cidercity1987 said:

We are one of, if not the biggest underachievers in the whole league system taking into account league placing v attendance and particularly league placing v potential.

Brentford are not a similar club to us, mainly given there tiny attendances. Now, half of ours and in the past never averaging anywhere near 10k for almost 45 years until 2015. 

Agree about being historic underachievers. But why does everyone harp on about attendance like it means something? To me a club that averages 50k gates and achieves nothing isn’t a ‘big club’. A well supported club, yes, but that’s not stature in any meaningful sense. 

To me a big club is a club with a history of honours. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 hours ago, Davefevs said:

I’m mixed.  It would be a bit gutting if they or Brentford got to the Poem before us.  But for footballing value, yes.

Something like...

The Bees wandered lonely as a cloud,

That floats on high adrenalin o'er vales, long punts and hills,

When all at once I saw a crowd,

A host of golden misguided daffodils,

Beside Griffin Park, beneath the goal post trees

Fluttering and dancing like silly supporters expecting mighty things in the breeze.

Some sort of poem like that? ?

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

One of the biggest differences between the two clubs is Brentford play fast attacking football and regularly score plenty of goals whereas Bristol City play ........  side to side and might eventually get a scuffed shot away!!!

Tactics are very different!

That said - Brentford were probably the second best team at Ashton Gate this season, after Leeds in day one!  (How the wheels have come off Leeds!!!)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, BRISTOL86 said:

Yes and I’ve explained why I see us as similar clubs. Attendances, especially historic, are a fairly crude way of measuring a club’s standing IMO, 12k v 20k through the gates at this level is fairly inconsequential to overall chance of success. 

I tend to divide this league into 4 pots - those who you’d have competing for automatic promotion, those who you’d say should be competing the playoffs, then a fairly wide ‘mid table’ band and those who will see staying up as a decent achievement. 

I would have thought 99% of fans would put us and Brentford in the same pot. 

Re the wage example it’s just the latest data I could find, I keep reading how plucky little Brentford are doing brilliantly on a tiny budget and it’s not really true. It’s not massive compared to some clubs but people talk like they’re a Luton or a Rotherham at times. 

Twelve thousand v  twenty thousand is significantly different. 

I don't think it is a crude way of measuring similarity of attendances. and their similarity over decades. City's gates were sometimes only two thousand bigger (80's) but when gates are below ten thousand that is significant. 

Visiting Griffin park over decades was a visit to a smaller club. 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 hours ago, cidercity1987 said:

Another tiny club in the Prem before us, no thanks.

I think I am right in saying that the next club promoted out of us, Brentford and Preston will be the Premier League's 50th club ?

Very disappointing for us to have taken so long, but a minor accolade I suppose ?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Cowshed said:

Twelve thousand v  twenty thousand is significantly different. 

I don't think it is a crude way of measuring similarity of attendances. and their similarity over decades. City's gates were sometimes only two thousand bigger (80's) but when gates are below ten thousand that is significant. 

Visiting Griffin park over decades was a visit to a smaller club. 

 

If you define a club’s size by the number of fans in the stands then yes, but IMO it’s only one of a number of measures of assessing a club.

i.e the stature of a club and the number of fans that support that club are not one and the same. We’ve achieved absolutely nothing in 125 years, we’re not big by anyone’s estimation other than our own.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

33 minutes ago, BRISTOL86 said:

Agree about being historic underachievers. But why does everyone harp on about attendance like it means something? To me a club that averages 50k gates and achieves nothing isn’t a ‘big club’. A well supported club, yes, but that’s not stature in any meaningful sense. 

To me a big club is a club with a history of honours. 

I know we have all been through this debate numerous times; and I have no wish to prolong it any more than necessary.

I do disagree to a certain extent. History relates to a club's past, rather than where it sits TODAY.

By basing the size of a club by it's history, then Swindon, Wimbledon, Luton & Oxford would all rank as a bigger club than us, as they have won the FA Cup / League Cup.

Personally, I just cannot see that.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 hours ago, italian dave said:

Assuming we don't go up...would miss one of the best away trips of the season, and especially next year in their new ground.

Would certainly not miss trips to Leeds, Preston or Blackburn!

This is it for me. I really like Brentford and a colleague is a Brentford season ticket holder. He is a lovely guy and I’d be really pleased for him if they went up. But I really enjoy Brentford away and want to still get to play them next season, no matter what division.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, The Gasbuster said:

I know we have all been through this debate numerous times; and I have no wish to prolong it any more than necessary.

I do disagree to a certain extent. History relates to a club's past, rather than where it sits TODAY.

By basing the size of a club by it's history, then Swindon, Wimbledon, Luton & Oxford would all rank as a bigger club than us, as they have won the League Cup.

Personally, I just cannot see that.

Yeah - I think the idea of a team being “big” because of history is just nonsense fans of failing teams cling to as a comfort blanket to feel better.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 minutes ago, The Gasbuster said:

I know we have all been through this debate numerous times; and I have no wish to prolong it any more than necessary.

I do disagree to a certain extent. History relates to a club's past, rather than where it sits TODAY.

By basing the size of a club by it's history, then Swindon, Wimbledon, Luton & Oxford would all rank as a bigger club than us, as they have won the FA Cup / League Cup.

Personally, I just cannot see that.

Yeah I completely get that. I don’t think there’s any exact science to it, we all have a different definition of what makes a club big.

The likes of Leeds and Forest are still dining out on success from decades ago to a degree. But I’d wager that 90% of football fans would consider us and Brentford similarly sized clubs - ie two clubs with a rich history of achieving absolutely nothing! 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, BRISTOL86 said:

Yes and I’ve explained why I see us as similar clubs. Attendances, especially historic, are a fairly crude way of measuring a club’s standing IMO, 12k v 20k through the gates at this level is fairly inconsequential to overall chance of success. 

I tend to divide this league into 4 pots - those who you’d have competing for automatic promotion, those who you’d say should be competing the playoffs, then a fairly wide ‘mid table’ band and those who will see staying up as a decent achievement. 

I would have thought 99% of fans would put us and Brentford in the same pot. 

Re the wage example it’s just the latest data I could find, I keep reading how plucky little Brentford are doing brilliantly on a tiny budget and it’s not really true. It’s not massive compared to some clubs but people talk like they’re a Luton or a Rotherham at times. 

Club size is based on fanbase, stadium size, geographical catchment and history, success etc. Given success equals more fans, the word 'attendance' in my mind accurately sums up all of that to equate the overall size of that club, maybe adjusted for current standing. If Sunderland averaged 15k in League 1 doesn't mean we are bigger than them no. But let's take PNE, very successful in the past but from a very small town. They are not a bigger club than us because they have less fans, even accounting for the extra fans their historical success would have attracted to them. Same with Blackburn as a more recent case. That's my opinion and I know re the likes of Blackburn others will disagree.

It's a mistake to equate only success to size imo. We are bigger than Wigan and the other clubs Gasbuster mentioned. Bristol City playing in a 27k stadium with an average of 21k are comfortably top half Champ sized club behind the likes of Leeds, Sheff Wed, Nottm Forest (similar sized cities but those teams had success historically and attracted more fans) on par or slightly smaller than Birmingham, Stoke (smaller catchment, more success equals pretty similar attendance) and probably (spit) Cardiff and bigger than many teams like QPR, Blackburn, Reading, Swansea, Preston and miles bigger than clubs like Brentford, Luton etc.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

17 minutes ago, cidercity1987 said:

Club size is based on fanbase, stadium size, geographical catchment and history, success etc. Given success equals more fans, the word 'attendance' in my mind accurately sums up all of that to equate the overall size of that club, maybe adjusted for current standing. If Sunderland averaged 15k in League 1 doesn't mean we are bigger than them no. But let's take PNE, very successful in the past but from a very small town. They are not a bigger club than us because they have less fans, even accounting for the extra fans their historical success would have attracted to them. Same with Blackburn as a more recent case. That's my opinion and I know re the likes of Blackburn others will disagree.

It's a mistake to equate only success to size imo. We are bigger than Wigan and the other clubs Gasbuster mentioned. Bristol City playing in a 27k stadium with an average of 21k are comfortably top half Champ sized club behind the likes of Leeds, Sheff Wed, Nottm Forest (similar sized cities but those teams had success historically and attracted more fans) on par or slightly smaller than Birmingham, Stoke (smaller catchment, more success equals pretty similar attendance) and probably (spit) Cardiff and bigger than many teams like QPR, Blackburn, Reading, Swansea, Preston and miles bigger than clubs like Brentford, Luton etc.

 

Completely agree but also mad to say we’re ‘bigger’ than Bournemouth, unless your definition of bigger is ‘more fans can fit in the stadium’.

Once, yes we were, now, we’re miles away from being as big as Bournemouth. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

We have nine years top class football to Brentford's five; we were last at the top 40 years ago, Brentford in 1947 (73 years ago).

We have 51 seasons at the second tier, Brentford 15.  51 v 15.

We have 2 seasons of bottom division football in our locker; Brentford 15, most recently in 2009.

We have contested an FA Cup final, and one semi final; quarter final is as far as Brentford have gone in this.

Three league cup semi finals for us; 4th round the furthest Brentford have ever made it.

We average 20k plus currently; Brentford last averaged 20k in 1952.

 

This might not be shiny, silver cups but it is what we have "achieved," and it is demonstrably more than Brentford have managed.

 

Trying to make out that Brentford and us have been on a par, more or less, appears to be somewhat desperate. How much lower can the bar go?

Brentford were 4th bottom for wages in the Championship two seasons ago, above only Burton, Barnsley and Millwall.

Brentford's current average is put at 12k above, but the records show 10,200 for the last two seasons. Less than half our average last season.

None of this - attendances, and therefore income - really counts? Great, then we can compete with Leeds and co, then.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Good post @Moments of Pleasure and some good points made. 

Somewhat going round in circles but I don’t think it’s unfair to say that in the grand scheme of things, neither club has anything to shout about in terms of achievements, and to most outside of Bristol we’d be seen as similarly well placed clubs in terms of likely onward progression from our current place in the world. 

I believe we have the potential to become significantly bigger than Brentford. But right now I think we’d be similarly regarded by a potential signing in terms of likelihood of career advancement.

They don’t pay tiny wages and aren’t the little tinpot club that those who point solely to attendances would have you believe. 

Brentford have rightly established themselves as a serious contender for promotion to the premier league, with a seemingly bulletproof recruitment strategy and demonstrable history of putting talented players in the shop window for big money moves.

Whilst it might make us feel better to use historical attendances or ‘number of seasons in the second tier’ to paint the picture that we’re light years ahead of them, the reality doesn’t hold up. Outside of BS3 these things are pretty meaningless. 

I find comparing attendances a pretty bizarre way of assessing a club’s ‘place’. Bristol is a huge city and Brentford is a small town with a massively smaller population, and has several massively more successful clubs within a stone‘a throw. It’d be ludicrous if our attendances weren’t massively bigger. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, cidercity1987 said:

We are one of, if not the biggest underachievers in the whole league system taking into account league placing v attendance and particularly league placing v potential.

Brentford are not a similar club to us, mainly given there tiny attendances. Now, half of ours and in the past never averaging anywhere near 10k for almost 45 years until 2015. 

So we’re the best at something .

:yes:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, Cowshed said:

Twelve thousand v  twenty thousand is significantly different. 

I don't think it is a crude way of measuring similarity of attendances. and their similarity over decades. City's gates were sometimes only two thousand bigger (80's) but when gates are below ten thousand that is significant. 

Visiting Griffin park over decades was a visit to a smaller club. 

 

Surely the fact that we've been visiting Griffin Park over those decades says something about the relative status of the two clubs?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, italian dave said:

Surely the fact that we've been visiting Griffin Park over those decades says something about the relative status of the two clubs?

And I firmly suspect when attendances are taken as a percentage of the population of the town/City, they’re considerably ahead of us, even accounting for the fact that there’s more than one (allegedly) professional club in Bristol. 

Fans willy waving over attendances and giving it the ‘my club’s bigger than your club’ is proper cringey.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

38 minutes ago, italian dave said:

Surely the fact that we've been visiting Griffin Park over those decades says something about the relative status of the two clubs?

It was a point about attendances not status. Bristol City fans at Griffin Park (80 - 90's) could be a quarter of the gate and more. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...