Are we the biggest underachievers in British football?

[Red_Alligator]

No. Newcastle United are, all things considered. 

Admittedly with their new owners, those fortunes might change somewhat.

[handsofclay]

5 hours ago, Red-Robbo said:

Chelmsford City FC.  Town of 160,000. Nearish London. Never played in the league and currently Tier 6. 

You trumped my suggestion which was going to be Bath City 

[ChippenhamRed]

9 hours ago, Supersonic Robin said:

Agree with just about every comment in this thread. We are undoubtedly the most underachieving club in the country. The biggest team in one of the biggest cities in England, with no real competitors for miles around. The list of clubs our size and smaller to have outperformed us is embarrassing.

I actually think the magnitude of our underachievement is so great that it warps our own perceptions of the club.

IMO, we are a bigger club than many of our fans believe. On paper, there is absolutely no reason why we shouldn't be one of the "top end" Championship teams. In terms of "resource" we have everything we need - big city, big fanbase, geographical dominance etc etc. I recall being shot down a few months ago for saying that Watford are, in theory, no bigger than us. The same goes for a host of "bigger" teams at this level - Watford, Norwich, WBA, Fulham, Derby, Sheffield Utd, Burnley, Middlesbrough, Blackburn, Brighton etc etc. In what sense are these bigger clubs who we shouldn't expect to compete with? Are they based in bigger cities with bigger fanbases and more potential? No, they're not.

It's the case that they're "bigger clubs" BECAUSE of what they've achieved, it's not the case that they've achieved more BECAUSE they're bigger clubs.

This distinction is incredibly important IMO.

Alas, after years of disappointing underachievement, many of our fans have understandably resigned to identifying us as a bottom end Championship (or perhaps even top end League 1) team, comparable to the likes of Rotherham, Wigan, and Blackpool (2 of which have played in the Premier League!).

Personally, I think we should raise expectations within the club & fanbase. We're not a club who should see Premier League football as a fanciful dream, nor are we a club who should consider promotion from League 1 a notable achievement. We should consider sporadic involvement in the Premier League to be a reasonable and realistic long term expectation, and Championship football to be a bare minimum.

 

Great post. How you define the size of a club is an endless debate, but for me I always ask the question “how many fans would they attract to a particular occasion, all other things being equal?”

And I point to the Walsall JPT final as an example. We took 45,000 fans that day.

There are lots of clubs that by another definition - based more on success and silverware - might be considered “bigger” than us, who wouldn’t take 45,000 fans to a tinpot trophy final against Walsall. To my mind that proves how much potential there is here for a big, established Premier League club with big crowds.

[ChippenhamRed]

5 hours ago, Red_Alligator said:

No. Newcastle United are, all things considered. 

Admittedly with their new owners, those fortunes might change somewhat.

Sorry but I disagree. Over the course of their history they have won four league titles, six FA Cups and a European title (Fairs Cup). Even in their more recent history they’ve spent the majority of their time in the Premier League, qualified to play in Europe and reached FA Cup finals.

That’s a hell of a lot more than us.

[Bris Red]

23 minutes ago, ChippenhamRed said:

Great post. How you define the size of a club is an endless debate, but for me I always ask the question “how many fans would they attract to a particular occasion, all other things being equal?”

And I point to the Walsall JPT final as an example. We took 45,000 fans that day.

There are lots of clubs that by another definition - based more on success and silverware - might be considered “bigger” than us, who wouldn’t take 45,000 fans to a tinpot trophy final against Walsall. To my mind that proves how much potential there is here for a big, established Premier League club with big crowds.

Agreed. Also worth noting that our average home attendances over the last 4 or 5 seasons at this level have been fairly impressive aswell considering how little success we have had over the last 40 years.

I can’t think of many clubs if any with our lack of recent success and with no topflight stint since the early 80s that averages 20k at home..

[Cityboy1954]

18 hours ago, ChippenhamRed said:

I mentioned this on the Lincoln match thread but thought it deserved its own topic.

I’m 40 next year. In FOUR DECADES of supporting City, the high points amount to nothing more than a few third tier promotions and Cup wins against Liverpool and United. City fans of my generation have never seen us play in the top division, and we’re not even that young any more. It’s increasingly conceivable we never will. That’s about half the fanbase now.

This despite supporting a club in the 11th biggest city in the country. A football city, not a rugby city (check the attendances). A club with a (now) great stadium and first class training facilities. A club capable of taking 45,000 fans to a game two hours away against Walsall. A club with no bigger clubs within 100 miles.

Meanwhile in my lifetime I’ve witnessed Wigan, Barnsley, Huddersfield, Blackpool, Swansea, Swindon, Bournemouth, Luton and Reading all play in top division. Blackburn even won the bloody thing!

I increasingly hate the fact that I was born into supporting this club.

Pound for pound, are we the unluckiest fans in the country? Are we the biggest underachievers in British football?

True could have been born a Gashead though

[cidered abroad]

15 hours ago, Bris Red said:

Agreed. Also worth noting that our average home attendances over the last 4 or 5 seasons at this level have been fairly impressive aswell considering how little success we have had over the last 40 years.

I can’t think of many clubs if any with our lack of recent success and with no topflight stint since the early 80s that averages 20k at home..

I understand your comments and agree with your view on our recent support.

However, should we get relegated, a different scenario arises.

Bigger clubs, like Derby, Wednesday, Ipswich, Norwich when they drop to League One, maintain their attendances much better than City. Ours will probably drop to 10,000 to 12,000 because we are so used to a return to the Third tier. The bigger clubs do it much less than we do and their fans stick with them as they bounce back up much quicker than we do.

That is why it will be a big disaster for City if we drop down.

 

[Mr Popodopolous]

16 hours ago, Bris Red said:

Agreed. Also worth noting that our average home attendances over the last 4 or 5 seasons at this level have been fairly impressive aswell considering how little success we have had over the last 40 years.

I can’t think of many clubs if any with our lack of recent success and with no topflight stint since the early 80s that averages 20k at home..

Brighton I can give you as an unusual example.

Got relegated from the top flight in 1981-82, attendances middling yo low, Goldstone sold by hated owner, played at Gillingham for 2 years then at the Withdean for years.

Promotion back to 2nd tier, out of top flight nearly as long as us, plus going to the Amex- suddenly averaging 20k!! Fairly unusual?

[cidercity1987]

33 minutes ago, cidered abroad said:

I understand your comments and agree with your view on our recent support.

However, should we get relegated, a different scenario arises.

Bigger clubs, like Derby, Wednesday, Ipswich, Norwich when they drop to League One, maintain their attendances much better than City. Ours will probably drop to 10,000 to 12,000 because we are so used to a return to the Third tier. The bigger clubs do it much less than we do and their fans stick with them as they bounce back up much quicker than we do.

That is why it will be a big disaster for City if we drop down.

 

15,000 in League One is more likely post redevelopment. I dont think we are the club that used to average 14k in Champ and 11k in League One anymore

Edited November 10, 2022 by cidercity1987

[REDOXO]

There was a whole series about this. Us and PNE were neck and neck for being the biggest under achievers of the Prem era. 
 

PNE were considered the ‘winner’ because they have previous league and cup wins in their history. 
 

My personal opinion is that our success in the 70s was at a time we weren’t considered nice as a club and a city. In fact the intimidation level here was pretty high from the moment you parked your car. These days we have the effing singing section and minimal vocal support behind the goal, but give that to our opponents! 
 

The utterly **** decisions in this area just make me angry and just continues the idea we are soft. Which is true. 

[Winterstoke toad]

32 minutes ago, REDOXO said:

There was a whole series about this. Us and PNE were neck and neck for being the biggest under achievers of the Prem era. 
 

PNE were considered the ‘winner’ because they have previous league and cup wins in their history. 
 

My personal opinion is that our success in the 70s was at a time we weren’t considered nice as a club and a city. In fact the intimidation level here was pretty high from the moment you parked your car. These days we have the effing singing section and minimal vocal support behind the goal, but give that to our opponents! 
 

The utterly **** decisions in this area just make me angry and just continues the idea we are soft. Which is true. 

I’m only in my 20s but every time I hear someone say singing section I can’t help but cringe .

[Ivorguy]

18 hours ago, ChippenhamRed said:

Sorry but I disagree. Over the course of their history they have won four league titles, six FA Cups and a European title (Fairs Cup). Even in their more recent history they’ve spent the majority of their time in the Premier League, qualified to play in Europe and reached FA Cup finals.

That’s a hell of a lot more than us.

Oh please!  We once won the Welsh Cup.  Newcastle never got near that trophy.

[Sturny]

If we go by the simple size of city = should have football success… then it’s Bath surely? 

[The Journalist]

On 09/11/2022 at 07:16, ChippenhamRed said:

I increasingly hate the fact that I was born into supporting this club.

Possibly the most depressing - but relatable - single sentence I've read in two decades of browsing this forum.

[cidered abroad]

2 hours ago, cidercity1987 said:

15,000 in League One is more likely post redevelopment. I dont think we are the club that used to average 14k in Champ and 11k in League One anymore

I hope that if the drop does come, that the support holds up. I'm doubtful though.

[REDOXO]

1 hour ago, Winterstoke toad said:

I’m only in my 20s but every time I hear someone say singing section I can’t help but cringe .

Exactly. I’m in my 60s as I’m sure you worked out. Nice ground, nice city, nice club, it even has a singing section. Luckily this is the manking section that very occasionally is not talking complete bollox. 

[Winterstoke toad]

1 hour ago, Sturny said:

If we go by the simple size of city = should have football success… then it’s Bath surely? 

Bath has a fairly small population for a city though of just around 100,000.  I can see why you’d say bath but there’s lots of higher population towns and city’s with poor teams .

[Lanterne Rouge]

Is Plymouth still the biggest English city with a league club that has never played in the top division? Whenever they used to play Hull back in the day they always used to say they were the biggest two.

Obviously that changed a few years back............................................