Clubs in this league in size order

[Bottega Don]

Yes but only since the PL days. Could make a case with Bradford too, no?

Bradford City have been bigger than the Bradford Bulls since the late 2000's, the Bulls were relegated to the Championship not too long ago and only average about 7k or so at home, Bradford City are definitely the biggest sporting team in Bradford.

 

[AtaturkOzgutson]

Bradford City have been bigger than the Bradford Bulls since the late 2000's, the Bulls were relegated to the Championship not too long ago and only average about 7k or so at home, Bradford City are definitely the biggest sporting team in Bradford.

Fair, sounds like Wigan but backwards!

I wish you could put a football crowd on the Bradford terrace though!

 

[Freethinker]

Think you have to divorce ancient history and success from these calculation.

Crowd size also isn't the be all and end all of it. Think you have go at it with a fair helping of 'potential'. What are the chances of the club being successful and how sustainable is it.

Take Coventry for example, they were a fixture up in the top division for a long while, got a bit too big for their boots, built a white elephant ground and ended up playing in Northampton in the 3rd Division and now a tenant in their 'own' ground.

Their current position is that of a well supported but financially dire club. Hard to place them in the top half of this division clubs, but not much lower as they could attract a buyer who could remedy their woes (new ground?)

 

[Walkley_Owl]

Think you have to divorce ancient history and success from these calculation.

Crowd size also isn't the be all and end all of it. Think you have go at it with a fair helping of 'potential'. What are the chances of the club being successful and how sustainable is it.

Take Coventry for example, they were a fixture up in the top division for a long while, got a bit too big for their boots, built a white elephant ground and ended up playing in Northampton in the 3rd Division and now a tenant in their 'own' ground.

Their current position is that of a well supported but financially dire club. Hard to place them in the top half of this division clubs, but not much lower as they could attract a buyer who could remedy their woes (new ground?)

Give over. Coventry are much bigger than 56th in the country. Talking of white elephants how often is the new den half full?

 

[UTS]

We are a pretty small club for this level but not as small as some make out. Decent history, and when we are doing well our gates push 6,000.

We have a fickle fanbase, happens when everyone's second team is Man U/City. 187,000 live in Bury borough so potential is there??

Either way, couldn't give a shit. Hopefully we reestablish ourselves at this level again in the next few years.

 

[UTS]

Also, I don't think Col U are as small as you make out either.. Decent recent history in the Championship, decent infrastructure and despite being turd this season they still get over 4,000 home fans..

I reckon a giveaway to club size is to look at who the clubs rivals are, most clubs share rivalries that can be reciprocated.

All Bury/Dale need is for someone to come in and really wake the townsfolk up to their local football team. Populations are big enough and at Bury it's pretty cheap.. Not enough is done to get them through the gates I reckon.

 

[THE TERRACEMAN]

I would agree Fleetwood are the only club smaller than us. Our recent achievements are astonishing for the size of the club. The club is run correctly and the fan base is growing.

 

[WFC]

Too many teams are of a similar size give or take a little.

Proper can of worms thread !

 

[Freethinker]

Give over. Coventry are much bigger than 56th in the country.

Not at the moment.

Talking of white elephants how often is the new den half full?

As for the Den, you are correct, it is often half full, rather than that half empty feeling of much bigger grounds, but has nothing to really to do with the point I sought to make, in that Coventry shot themselves in the foot with that ground and are now a much much smaller (or weaker if you prefer) club. They have very good potential for a League One outfit, but to unlock it, need a huge investment and probably a new ground.

 

[SF_]

Think you have to divorce ancient history and success from these calculation.

Crowd size also isn't the be all and end all of it. Think you have go at it with a fair helping of 'potential'. What are the chances of the club being successful and how sustainable is it.

Take Coventry for example, they were a fixture up in the top division for a long while, got a bit too big for their boots, built a white elephant ground and ended up playing in Northampton in the 3rd Division and now a tenant in their 'own' ground.

Their current position is that of a well supported but financially dire club. Hard to place them in the top half of this division clubs, but not much lower as they could attract a buyer who could remedy their woes (new ground?)

So we're not taking into account crowds, history or success when judging a club's size?

So basically we're just going off league position and whether a club owns their stadium?

Other than Sheffield United, there is no one in this league with more 'potential' than Coventry.

 

[Freethinker]

So we're not taking into account crowds, history or success when judging a club's size?

So basically we're just going off league position and whether a club owns their stadium?

Other than Sheffield United, there is no one in this league with more 'potential' than Coventry.

Weird how you can write something and people read the opposite. Coventry have potential, they also have the biggest obstacle in the way of fulfilling that potential, their current owners and the ground. That puts them behind a lot of what would be 'smaller' clubs on the face of it. Can it be turned around, of course, Portsmouth are in recovery phase from a similar disaster. Perhaps best summed up as Health rating is an important part of club size.

Would be good to get a Coventry fans input on this, just how precarious a position Coventry are in at the moment.

As for Ancient History, Bury won things over 100 years ago, not relevant to today is it.

 

[SF_]

Weird how you can write something and people read the opposite. Coventry have potential, they also have the biggest obstacle in the way of fulfilling that potential, their current owners and the ground. That puts them behind a lot of what would be 'smaller' clubs on the face of it. Can it be turned around, of course, Portsmouth are in recovery phase from a similar disaster. Perhaps best summed up as Health rating is an important part of club size.

Would be good to get a Coventry fans input on this, just how precarious a position Coventry are in at the moment.

As for Ancient History, Bury won things over 100 years ago, not relevant to today is it.

Bury winning things in the dark ages still edges them above similar clubs who have done nothing, ever though in the grand scheme of things imo.

It's the fact that you think crowd size has little importance. If it's a couple of thousand here and there then fair enough but despite Coventry's boring existence and recent shit they still have the third biggest crowds in this league and were averaging 20k crowds less than 10 years ago. I think the amount of people a club gets through the turnstiles when things aren't going great on the pitch is the best way of judging club size.

Using current ownership as a variable is a weird one as they come and go, with that criteria, Bournemouth are huge. I think ordering clubs in terms of their future prospects is completely different to doing it by size, in fact, I think it would be more interesting.

 

[blade1889]

Why does it matter? No one in league one supports their club because they're the biggest or we'd all be in the PL forum raving about Man Utd or our brand new Leicester City tattoos. If anything I want to distance myself as much as possible from being like that lot. T'only thing that matters is how good you are on the pitch which puts us nowhere near the top in any objective measurement.

 

[T.A]

The best thing about my club is that we're not supported very well which means when I go to a match of someone's being a c*** or smells. I can just go and sit somewhere else. It's great. Never understood the facination of big crowds. People are annoying and say stupid things.

 

[loz]

The best thing about my club is that we're not supported very well which means when I go to a match of someone's being a c*** or smells. I can just go and sit somewhere else. It's great. Never understood the facination of big crowds. People are annoying and say stupid things.

With an attitude like that, you could be talking about yourself.

 

[T.A]

With an attitude like that, you could be talking about yourself.

You're the type of person I'd move away from.

 

[blade1889]

Sounds like an agreement could be reached here. How about neither of you never sit near the other?

The appeal of big crowds for me is when everyone gets going, 2,000 packed in away fans create a better atmosphere than 500 spread over 2,000 seats.

 

[Zeus]

Are Wigan Athletic even the biggest sporting team in their own town?

No, but neither are Sheffield United, and they're the biggest club in the division.

 

[Jamie_Posh]

Why are Gillingham and port vale bigger than us? Genuine question

 

[Indian Dan]

Good question

 

[Jamo]

Sheff United >>>>Cov>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>Bradford>>>>>>>>>>>>Us/Millwall/Wigan>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>who gives a fuck

 

[The Reverend Skyblue]

Weird how you can write something and people read the opposite. Coventry have potential, they also have the biggest obstacle in the way of fulfilling that potential, their current owners and the ground. That puts them behind a lot of what would be 'smaller' clubs on the face of it. Can it be turned around, of course, Portsmouth are in recovery phase from a similar disaster. Perhaps best summed up as Health rating is an important part of club size.

Would be good to get a Coventry fans input on this, just how precarious a position Coventry are in at the moment.

As for Ancient History, Bury won things over 100 years ago, not relevant to today is it.

One of the Cov fans on here will give an input soonish but at the moment we are still trying to get over the teams implosion post Xmas, we are still in shock at how truely shit we were from January.We lost at home to Colchester you know in all that, that needs time and counselling to cope with that.
I'm nearing recovery so might be able to do it tomorrow

 

[F!RTHY]

Sheff Utd
Cov
Bradford
Barnsley/Millwall
Wigan
Swindon
Blackpool

Who cares about the rest........

 

[Jockney]

Not entirely sure why Bradford are ranked above both us and Barnsley? Their post-war record is worse than either of ours (only 13 seasons at a level higher than the 3rd tier since 1927. Since 1945, Barnsley and ourselves have managed 41 and 35 respectively), as were their attendances on the whole. All things considered, I think it'd be fair to lump them in a group with both of us... but higher?

 

[Craig]

Only 13 seasons, I'm quite surprised to learn that.

 

[MJA]

Why are Gillingham and port vale bigger than us? Genuine question

I'm really not sure why Gillingham are classed as bigger than you to be honest

 

[UTS]

This topic came up in L2 last year. I ranked each team in order of size, but also put certain clubs in tiers depending on their pedigree, the higher rank within a tier means you are the biggest club in that said group. My effort is as follows and is done on gut instinct. I've tried to couple historical success and achievements with attendances. feedback appreciated

-------- TIER ONE --------
1. Sheffield United
2. Coventry City
------- TIER TWO ------
3. Bradford City
------ TIER THREE -----
4. Barnsley
5. Millwall
6. Blackpool
7. Wigan Athletic
------- TIER FOUR -----
8. Swindon Town
9. Peterborough United
10. Southend United
------ TIER FIVE -------
11. Port Vale
12. Chesterfield
13. Gillingham
14. Doncaster Rovers
15. Oldham Athletic
16. Shrewsbury Town
17. Walsall
18. Crewe Alexandra
------- TIER SIX -----
19. Bury
20. Scunthorpe United
21. Colchester United
22. Rochdale
------- TIER SEVEN------
23. Burton Albion
24. Fleetwood Town

 

[valefan16]

Why are Gillingham and port vale bigger than us? Genuine question

You've only has about 5 seasons in the second tier... We've had over 40.

Bigger ground, more trophies (all be it by 1) and higher all time average attendances.

Good little site this is:
http://www.european-football-statistics.co.uk/attn.htm

Although keep Firthy away from some of those Bradford attendances in the early 80s. Shows some fluctuations that have happened over time... We were getting over 20,000 at this level in the 50s!

 

[UTS]

You've only has about 5 seasons in the second tier... We've had over 40.

Bigger ground, more trophies (all be it by 1) and higher all time average attendances.

Good little site this is:
http://www.european-football-statistics.co.uk/attn.htm

Although keep Firthy away from some of those Bradford attendances in the early 80s. Shows some fluctuations that have happened over time... We were getting over 20,000 at this level in the 50s!

Decent site that, can see how clubs have risen and fallen.

Interesting facts concerning Bury based off that website: (I will ignore the mid to late 80's as EVERYONE had low crowds then, our lowest ever av attendance was recorded at 2,104)

- We were regularly achieving 5 figure attendances until 1964.
- Seems in the 'modern' era, the period we were biggest was 1996-2000 where we were regularly pulling in crowds of 5-6k playing in the 3rd then 2nd tier.
- Funnily enough, almost immediately after this peak period, came our lowest ebb.. 2005-08, struggling in L2 infront of 2,500 average crowds.
- We seem to be slowly recovering.. (very slowly) gates on the whole up over 1,000 from 10 years ago.
- Compared to most clubs, our gates fluctuate very little, and thats what will kill us in the end. When doing bad we average 2,500 and when doing good we average about 4,500 (we were averaging more than this around October this season before we utterly collapsed). Some may say our gates can almost double depending on how we are doing, but on the face of it, that still only an extra 2,500-3,000 fans.

As well as whats already been said.. we were a decent sized club until the mid 60's, could this decline ever since have mirrored the rise of ease of transport/rise of TV football/rise of Manchester City/United? I'd probably say its no coincidence. These are problems that clubs such as Southend/Shrewsbury/Peterborough don't have to face as their is little major competition nearby. I do wonder, with the size of the Bury borough, what crowds Bury would achieve if it was placed somewhere else. But I guess I'll never know

 

[Bartonyellow]

Happy to be second bottom.
Happy to be second top in the league