Pingu Posted May 20, 2021 Share Posted May 20, 2021 On 17/05/2021 at 12:31, TheGaffer said: Big clubs don't yo yo from championship to league 1 over the course of twenty years. We're of a similar stature to the likes of Barnsley and Peterborough and Rotherham in that regard. It's pathetic for a club with our potential but that's all we offer, potential. I'd say we're more similar to Forest, Coventry, Derby and Sunderland, on the bigger side for clubs outside the Premier League but due to the fact we've all been away from the top level for so long it is hurting us. I believe if you ask most Premier League fans would they prefer us or Burnley in their league they'd pick us still. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Truth is out there Posted May 20, 2021 Share Posted May 20, 2021 1 hour ago, PaoloDiCanio12 said: I said around the same time (5-10 year after) so it doesn’t make that much of a difference and this is over 130 years of attendance so a few years after isn’t going to make a difference. “around the same time” ?!?!?- your posts must be being altered in the ether afore they get to me ”few years...isn’t going to make a difference” ?!?!! 10 seasons x 11 games x (conservatively) 10,000 attendees = > 1 million folk Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Mcguigan Posted May 20, 2021 Share Posted May 20, 2021 37 minutes ago, Truth is out there said: “around the same time” ?!?!?- your posts must be being altered in the ether afore they get to me ”few years...isn’t going to make a difference” ?!?!! 10 seasons x 11 games x (conservatively) 10,000 attendees = > 1 million folk There all facts though mate, apparently. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Buckwheat Posted May 20, 2021 Share Posted May 20, 2021 1 hour ago, Pingu said: I'd say we're more similar to Forest, Coventry, Derby and Sunderland, on the bigger side for clubs outside the Premier League but due to the fact we've all been away from the top level for so long it is hurting us. I believe if you ask most Premier League fans would they prefer us or Burnley in their league they'd pick us still. You've got to be joking with that last sentence. They wouldn't. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Buckwheat Posted May 20, 2021 Share Posted May 20, 2021 2 hours ago, LondonOwl313 said: It’s hard to say because teams like City or Chelsea at the time wouldn’t have envisaged being able to get those sorts of attendances. If we were top 6 right now, we’d probably just about fill Hillsborough. But let’s say we’d never been relegated and instead over the last 20 years we’d built the club up and being consistently in Europe and often the Champions League. Could definitely see us getting 55k in that scenario because there would be so many tag alongs, plus the younger generation would be engaged with it. It’s an impossible one to answer though because we haven’t been successful and I think it would take decades of sustained success rather than just getting there Quotes like that is why we look like a laughing stock. We will never get those attendances, maybe 30K's if we did well in the Prem. Still it's all hypothetical. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest LondonOwl313 Posted May 20, 2021 Share Posted May 20, 2021 3 minutes ago, Buckwheat said: Quotes like that is why we look like a laughing stock. We will never get those attendances, maybe 30K's if we did well in the Prem. Still it's all hypothetical. I’m talking in the hypothetical scenario where we’d been a champions league club for the last 20 years, not a championship league one yo-yo club. Success brings in new fans, lots of them glory seekers. If Leicester carry on as they are they could get those kind of attendances in a decade. How else do you think City, Chelsea, Everton, Arsenal etc have massively increased their attendances. It’s not from just bringing in a few more locals Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PaoloDiCanio12 Posted May 20, 2021 Share Posted May 20, 2021 4 hours ago, Truth is out there said: “around the same time” ?!?!?- your posts must be being altered in the ether afore they get to me ”few years...isn’t going to make a difference” ?!?!! 10 seasons x 11 games x (conservatively) 10,000 attendees = > 1 million folk Let’s say 5/6 years then, someone like West Ham, by what you have said we would have around, 600k head start, we’re ahead of them by 2 million on total attendance, so it’s clearly not just to do with that. The only one in that poll which it would be fair to say are better supported are leeds, anyway I’ll agree to disagree. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Truth is out there Posted May 20, 2021 Share Posted May 20, 2021 1 hour ago, PaoloDiCanio12 said: Let’s say 5/6 years then, someone like West Ham, by what you have said we would have around, 600k head start, we’re ahead of them by 2 million on total attendance, so it’s clearly not just to do with that. The only one in that poll which it would be fair to say are better supported are leeds, anyway I’ll agree to disagree. Or, let’s “say” what actually occurred? West Ham joined Football League 1919 (2nd Division) & promoted in 1923 (to a 21 club 1st division) Not withstanding the (conservative) crowd figure (10, 000) I (generously) suggested I reckon that makes a ( considerable) dent in the 1.4 ‘disparity’ you cite Cant @rsed to do the maths - the ‘research’ (although simple) was tedious enough ! Agree it’s not ‘“just” about longevity but , as (many) others have stated it’s equally not (just) about aggregate attendances The opportunity / capacity to calculate mean / median / mode is taught (if it is) in schools for a reason Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PaoloDiCanio12 Posted May 20, 2021 Share Posted May 20, 2021 2 hours ago, Truth is out there said: Or, let’s “say” what actually occurred? West Ham joined Football League 1919 (2nd Division) & promoted in 1923 (to a 21 club 1st division) Not withstanding the (conservative) crowd figure (10, 000) I (generously) suggested I reckon that makes a ( considerable) dent in the 1.4 ‘disparity’ you cite Cant @rsed to do the maths - the ‘research’ (although simple) was tedious enough ! Agree it’s not ‘“just” about longevity but , as (many) others have stated it’s equally not (just) about aggregate attendances The opportunity / capacity to calculate mean / median / mode is taught (if it is) in schools for a reason As I said mate, you have your opinion, I’ll have mine if you want a fairly even comparison, try post war comparison in crowds between swfc and West Ham, since the war, swfc have averaged more fans/higher attendance than West Ham, more times than West Ham have had higher attendance than us, up until the mismanagement era (obviously West Ham are miles infront on infrastructure) West Ham can now get large attendance so why couldn’t we, basing it on my aforementioned statement and other arguments I have put forward on crowds I will maintain my original opinion (29-31k relegation and 34k anywhere else.) That is my opinion, I’ll have mine and you’ll have yours though 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Buckwheat Posted May 21, 2021 Share Posted May 21, 2021 16 hours ago, PaoloDiCanio12 said: Let’s say 5/6 years then, someone like West Ham, by what you have said we would have around, 600k head start, we’re ahead of them by 2 million on total attendance, so it’s clearly not just to do with that. The only one in that poll which it would be fair to say are better supported are leeds, anyway I’ll agree to disagree. West Ham were always hampered by the size of their ground. Same with Portsmouth who would probably double their attendances with a larger ground. Same with Southampton who did. Don't forget WHU have played 20 less seasons than us when comparing total attendances. We've been lucky to have one of the, historically, biggest stadia which makes a lot of difference. Never presume on our crowds. Big Ron said after promotion to the top league we would average nearly 40000, we averaged 29000 with one of the best teams in our history. Totally futile arguments. We should accept what and where we are. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PaoloDiCanio12 Posted May 21, 2021 Share Posted May 21, 2021 4 hours ago, Buckwheat said: West Ham were always hampered by the size of their ground. Same with Portsmouth who would probably double their attendances with a larger ground. Same with Southampton who did. Don't forget WHU have played 20 less seasons than us when comparing total attendances. We've been lucky to have one of the, historically, biggest stadia which makes a lot of difference. Never presume on our crowds. Big Ron said after promotion to the top league we would average nearly 40000, we averaged 29000 with one of the best teams in our history. Totally futile arguments. We should accept what and where we are. In the season you are highlighting, we averaged just under 30k, the 4th highest attendance at the time, the only clubs at the time who averaged over or the same as 30k was arsenal Liverpool and Man Utd, that was the 4th best attendance (more than the title winners) that attendance is now worth 58-60k (not saying we would get it in today’s times) when we finished 13th in 94/95 season, we still averaged the 9th highest attendance (the 9th best attendance is now around 40k ) and even when we got relegated we averaged the 14th best attendance, (the 14th best attendance is now worth 30k) so I will stick by my original opinion and agree to disagree. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Buckwheat Posted May 22, 2021 Share Posted May 22, 2021 20 hours ago, PaoloDiCanio12 said: In the season you are highlighting, we averaged just under 30k, the 4th highest attendance at the time, the only clubs at the time who averaged over or the same as 30k was arsenal Liverpool and Man Utd, that was the 4th best attendance (more than the title winners) that attendance is now worth 58-60k (not saying we would get it in today’s times) when we finished 13th in 94/95 season, we still averaged the 9th highest attendance (the 9th best attendance is now around 40k ) and even when we got relegated we averaged the 14th best attendance, (the 14th best attendance is now worth 30k) so I will stick by my original opinion and agree to disagree. Sticking with this being a futile argument. The last time we hit 35000 was in 1954, yes 1954. Love the Owls but our thing about exaggerating and presupposing "massive" attendances does my head in. Used to stay in Westbury, L I, and love most of NYC especially Peter McManus bar on 19th and 7th. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ashley8 Posted May 22, 2021 Share Posted May 22, 2021 It's quite simple we ARE a BIG club. But we have had a poor team for a long long time. Look at the team's we play next season in their tiny grounds. We are a big club because we are historically and have the scope. A few seasons with ambition in the premier can transform any club but we spent many years of our last spell making up the numbers up there. If we had won the FA cup and the premiership in the early 90's we would have been in line for big rich owners and been like Chelsea were. In typical Wednesday fashion we dropped short and didn't have the ambition to fight to keep going for the title. We have stalled time and time again over the years... We stretch far enough to get in trouble financially but not enough to win and earn more money and prestige. If we the supporters allow the idea that we are not a big club fallen on hard times and blocked by the fiddle that is financial so called fair play choking us off from being able to complete we have no chance. The younger people on here who may think we are not a big club haven't seen us up there... Look at Man city they were the team in the shadow of man United never able to get anywhere near them... They got ridiculous amounts of money ALLOWED to be plowed in to it. But it was already a big club fallen on hard times so DID have the scope. People never used to mention with any importance if a player had played for Man city or Chelsea because they were like us at best the in the group behind man u and Liverpool. But in early 90's were average in the prem now any player ever is a former MAN CITY OR CHELSEA Player.... That's football.... It goes in cycles..... Liverpool in the 80's were untouchable Man U in the 90's it's all relative. If we forget we are a big club we will be lost! 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pingu Posted May 22, 2021 Share Posted May 22, 2021 Are we a bigger club than Sunderland? In the 90's I would have said yes 00's no but now I'm not sure who it is, 4 years in league one for them now. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
the monk Posted May 22, 2021 Share Posted May 22, 2021 Anyone else noticed that since a certain club averaged 30k its now become the new benchmark and mentioned in every attendance thread Makes one wonder who these posters support 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
alanharper Posted May 22, 2021 Share Posted May 22, 2021 2 hours ago, Pingu said: Are we a bigger club than Sunderland? In the 90's I would have said yes 00's no but now I'm not sure who it is, 4 years in league one for them now. I'd say Sunderland are bigger than us historically. (Sorry!) 6 league titles to our 4, 19 top 3 finishes to our 12, and 20 more top flight seasons than us. Always been well supported as well, even in their bad spells they never averaged below 14k or so. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now