League 1 v league 2. Talking standards now.

[hold'um Oldham]

All I ever heard before we were relegated was that the standard between the league's wasn't noticeable. There is my much difference between the two.

A decent enough chunk of the season has gone now, and I have to say I disagree entirely. This isn't to say we are steam hollering the league and anyone who should get in our way - we have cut our cloth according to our means, but I have to say the difference in quality is obvious.

I include ourselves now when I say this, but I am yet to see any real quality this season. We would regularly be facing the likes of Sheff u, Blackburn, Bolton, Wigan, etc, and even the midtable and lower teams had something about them. It was possibly the bottom six or so that were really poor. The league as a whole though held far more quality.

What are others thoughts?

 

[shoddycollins]

I agree, I think there's not much between the bottom half of League One and League Two, with the sizes of some of the teams who have established themselves in the Championship before ending up in League One now I'd say the big jump in quality happens half-way up League One, and the next big jump after that happens about four or five places from the bottom of the Premiership.

 

[Luke Imp]

I was saying to GodsGift on here or over Twitter the other month that I felt L2 to L1 was a decent jump. He'll have a decent insight as a neutral because he covers Blackpool.

Maybe not the bottom 8 or so, but L1 seems to be the one where you start to get the really good sides (probably a more 'footballing' division) and bigger sides who're having a hard time (a Leeds, Sheffield United, Southampton, Blackburn, Charlton, Sunderland etc etc).

The gap between the biggest and smallest budget is probably bigger, too.

 

[valefan16]

When we won promotion from league two back to league one the jump in quality was obvious and even the spells that we weren’t winning although finished top ten most fans were just happy to watch better quality matches.

 

[KeithH]

The gap is pretty big, we seem decent in this league, dire last year.

 

[KeithH]

That said football is all about momentum and if you keep that the gap seems not to exist, it's keeping the bugger when you go up thats the hard part.

 

[Moomin]

That said football is all about momentum and if you keep that the gap seems not to exist, it's keeping the bugger when you go up thats the hard part.

I agree with this. If you go up from L2 and retain your best players, recruit well then you can certainly still progress in L1, which has been proven over the years.

I think it’s more about when you’re struggling in L1, you would naturally be the losing side quite often and then struggle to hold onto a number of your better players if you go down. But as long as you retain players with a good work ethic/ attitude plus the odd talented player you can do pretty well in L2. That’s when the gap is more noticeable imo.

 

[ValiantRob]

There has always been a big gap but the last few years it seems the lower half of league 1 has been terrible and certainly in 2016/17 when we were relegated, all of the bottom 8 were crap and wouldn`t have been above half way in league 2.

 

[Hurrikeen]

The football I have watched so far this season - and I include us in that bracket on occasions - has been absolutely terrible.

Morecambe in the 2nd half was about as good as I've seen from an opposing team and that was nothing to rave about.

 

[hold'um Oldham]

Obviously I'm a novice at this level, with it being my first year here, but is this a particularly poor season or is it always this bad?

 

[localhero]

The football I have watched so far this season - and I include us in that bracket on occasions - has been absolutely terrible.

Morecambe in the 2nd half was about as good as I've seen from an opposing team and that was nothing to rave about.

I've been shocked this season at how good the standard of football has been. Teams actually trying to play football instead of time wasting from the very first minute. I'd assume that says more about non league than League Two though.

 

[GodsGift]

It's a tiresome debate which crops up every season, irrespective of what division you're in. Yes, of course the standard of League Two is worse than League One, I'd be worried if it wasn't. Surprise surprise, the Conference is worse than League Two as well.

Generally speaking, promoted sides from L2 will initially fare well in L1 due to momentum, but you'll need a bit of backing/big crowds/decent budget to compete at the top end. So you're looking at the likes of Plymouth and Pompey, who just missed out on the play-offs last season and Luton this year, who will probably be in and around it. This season you've currently got Accrington in 10th, Luton in 11th, Coventry in 12th and Wycombe in 19th. I'd expect Accrington to drop off (but still stay up), Coventry to remain in mid table and Wycombe will do well to stay up.

The top 6 or 7 in League One are strong, there's very little to split the sides in mid-table and those at the bottom are interchangeable with most of the top sides in League Two. Again, that's a pattern that is applicable to pretty much every league apart from the Prem. If Lincoln were in League One this season I'd expect us to stay up pretty comfortably and would be safe in mid table, similar to Coventry. We've got a strong squad but technically, it's not up to scratch for what is needed to push on into the top half of the division. We're not a million miles away though, which is encouraging.

 

[jbet]

I wen to Sunderland v Fleetwood the other week and the difference in standard to this league was massive.

 

[WhiteRussian]

Momentum, or lack of it is a major issue.

We were standard league 1 promotion contenders for a good few seasons. Then got promoted and screwed that up terribly. So were relegated followed by a tumble down the leagues which I suppose is reverse momentum .

I think it wasn't so much the team, or the quality but the manager(s). We got rid of Karl Robinson and brought in people with no knowledge of lower league football and they failed drastically. Now we have Tisdale to steady the ship.

So while there is a difference it isn't great (unless talking about the big boys), it's about momentum and managers as much as squad.

So does that mean if we get promoted we should chuck Tisdale and get a confirmed league on manager F*cked if I know!!!!

 

[valefan16]

Money isn’t everything as Burton proved and Yeovil a couple of years prior but it helps.

We all talk about the money say Lincoln have spent but in the league above plenty of teams would blow that out the water and they’d not be able to finance their way out of it without big big investment.

To sum it up a few seasons back Wigan had a modest start but were in and around the play offs so they just spent a million quid like that in January and promptly won the league.

Bolton who we faced had for example players on more than our entire starting XI (Wheater). Wolves again had a huge budget and I dare say Sunderland won’t be struggling to finance in January if needed.

One big problem I have is the parachute payments... teams such as Sunderland come down on big parachute payments which IMO should be stopped if you go down again. You simply don’t need millions in league one and should be forced to cut the cloth accordingly.

Only really Sheffield United came down and struggled to make a return for years with decent money and so forth so the standard is difficult if you plan to try and get another promotion.

That said we had modest budgets in our four seasons back there and finished two of them in the top half.

 

[King Kev]

That said football is all about momentum and if you keep that the gap seems not to exist, it's keeping the bugger when you go up thats the hard part.

Something that idiot Flitcroft failed to maintain, this led to three depressing years of big expenditure but depressing football.

 

[Indian Dan]

Once you’ve got relegated from L1 you have to get out real quick otherwise you’ll get sucked into what is the utter shiteness which is L2. We are tottering on the cusp at the moment, unsure whether we’re any good or not. Another season down here and we could be here for a while.

 

[ValiantRob]

I think in the bottom 2 divisions there is such a big turnover of players each season that if any team gets their recruitment wrong, they can have a fall from grace. This is even more dramatic in League 2 than L1( ask Chesterfield fans).
Sometimes this can mean that the worst sides in L1 are as bad if not worse than the strugglers in L2 and you quite often see a double relegation within a year or two such as Wrexham and Hartlepool suffered.

 

[The_Viking_Magpie]

Sadly it’s a little too long ago for me to remember. My assumption is the higher up the pyramid you go , the bigger the Jump. Seems logical to me

 

[TrinidadsNumberOne]

Probably best to make judgements about the league after you've played each of the teams at least once. I mean Oldham's wins have come against Crawley, Morecambe, Grimsby and Macclesfield after all. Four sides who I reckon will be no higher than lower mid-table come the season's end. You've obviously had a kind start to the season on the fixture list bar MK on opening day, but that'll change as the season pans out.

Once you look past the likes of Sunderland, Barnsley, Peterborough and Portsmouth in League One, four sides who, barring a spectacular financial crisis, won't ever be coming down to this level again anytime soon, any one of the sides below those four could easily come down to this level again. A lot of clubs in League One aren't out of place in League Two and vice versa. But everything is about momentum. In 2015, Chesterfield finished 6th in League One and attempted to get promotion to the Championship. Fast forward just over 3 years and Chesterfield are 4 points off the drop to the Conference North after a dismal run of 8 games without a win and scoring 1 goal in over 500 minutes of non league football. 2 divisions above them, Accrington Stanley have only lost once all season in a very competitive League One despite having the lowest budget in the division and a budget probably lower than Chesterfield's is in the Conference!

 

[Soup Ladle]

I noticed a fairly big gap when we were in L1 compared to L2. More 'football' was played and the top 6 always had some quality players. It wasn't perfect football on the deck but more of it, typically there'd be some nice passages of play with the final ball lacking. Plenty of aimless hoofball too but not on L2's level. I'd say the lower parts of L1 are pretty poor sides and wouldn't be much better than mid table L2, maybe worse.

On the other hand, it's hard to believe how much worse the Conference is than L2. I couldn't bear watching us in our maiden season there last year, it was that bad. Second season you get sucked in to thinking 'oh yeah Harrogate were really good at ours in August', last season I wouldn't be saying that. They're not a really good side by anyone else's standards apart from the tinpottery of that level. If you think L2 is bad, come down here. Be happy to swap places.

 

[Franchisor]

As someone who watched 30 L1 games last season and has watched all but 2 of our games this season in L2, there is a MASSIVE difference.

No big or standout teams in L2 this season who are punching below their weight. Last season we played the likes of Blackburn and Wigan who were clearly Championship level and playing in L1. Players like Adam Armstrong, Will Grigg, Bradley Dack etc were at times unplayable - there isn't anyone like that in L2.

Also looking at the rest of the teams in L1, the average quality is much higher. L2 feels like anyone can beat anyone this year, and none of the "top" teams/frontrunners really look miles ahead of others, compared to L1.

Last few seasons there have been massive or dominant teams in L2 (Portsmouth, Coventry etc), this season is the first in a while without anyone like that.

 

[The_Viking_Magpie]

Coventry ? Dominate? Only at the all important business end of the season. For half the season they stuttered.

Gap between L2 and L1 is smaller than L1 to Championship and bigger than L2 to Conference

The end

 

[RLC]

Gap between L2 and L1 is smaller than L1 to Championship and bigger than L2 to Conference

The end

I doubt it, to be honest. The gap between this division and the one below is enormous.

In our three years in the National League, even in the period when we were managed by Gary Brabin, we swotted aside 90% of our opponents, with a lot of games effectively won within the first thirty minutes. In that division the top sides can guarantee victory from all but a handful of games, and it is only the matches against your three or four closest rivals that are really competitive and decide who ultimately wins the league.

In League Two the standard is far better and far more uniform. You could put a cigarette paper between ourselves and virtually all of our opponents this season.

 

[The_Viking_Magpie]

Interesting thoughts RLC, problem is it’s very rare for a club to have been in all three divisions (L1,L2,NL) in recent times. Tranmere are one of the rare examples that qualify.

You have to remember some current L2 sides haven’t been in the third tier for over 25 years!!! Some never have at all. So naturally they won’t be able to comment, same applies with teams who havent played in the NL#stain for a long time or ever.

I hope , personally, I’m not in a position to judge any time soon

 

[Greenacres]

The gap between this division and the one below is enormous.

In that division the top sides can guarantee victory from all but a handful of games, and it is only the matches against your three or four closest rivals that are really competitive and decide who ultimately wins the league.

In League Two the standard is far better and far more uniform. You could put a cigarette paper between ourselves and virtually all of our opponents this season.

Apologies to RLC, I have chopped out the bits of their post that seemed to apply purely to Tranmere but find myself in almost total agreement with the rest.

I think we were surprised with the quality in Division Two when we were promoted. Ironically our first game in the League was against Barnet, we played really well in the first half, the standard was high and I was looking forward to a really competitive season and decent football. If ever there was a false dawn that was it, we struggled to compete for vast parts of the season and they ended up being relegated.

This season standards are fairly similar, I have seen us play against a few other teams and the margins have been small, probably why we have drawn so many games. Substitutions really can count, when Swindon brought on Elijah Adebayo and Port Vale introduced Ricky Miller we really struggled to cope, if they had played from the start the results might have been different. I have only seen one team play against us this season, so far, who I thought we struggled to contain and that was Oldham. They reminded me of Luton from a couple of years ago, during the season they were promoted from the National League. There was an element of intimidation about their game, not nice to watch but could prove effective over a season.

 

[UTS]

Look at us for example, bottom of league one last season and struggled for a few seasons there, League Two we seem to have found our feet.

The gap in quality will change every year depending on numerous factors. League One is filled will what you would class as ‘good league Two ’ teams.

However, look at Chesterfield, Tranmere and Stockport who fell straight through... or on the other side, Burton, Rochdale and Plymouth who seem comfortable in L1. Accrington have made a solid start in L1 too but again it’s about momentum.

 

[Luke Imp]

I doubt it, to be honest. The gap between this division and the one below is enormous.

In League Two the standard is far better and far more uniform. You could put a cigarette paper between ourselves and virtually all of our opponents this season.

I think you'll find that as a newly promoted side, we did last season, although in our opening game of the season last year against Morecambe, we absolutely battered them. Biggest difference was the quality in goalkeeping.

As you get better, either this season or next season, you'll find that there's still a decent difference between sides at the top and bottom. At the minute, you're probably a mid-table side so you'll see the minimum amount of difference between yourselves and either end of the table.

Early days, but using Lincoln vs Notts as an example, and perhaps it was an anomaly, that game was as easy at top vs bottom in the NL in terms of the gap between the sides. Last week against Macclesfield was similar, albeit not the scoreline to reflect that.

 

[The_Viking_Magpie]

Individual examples verge on being pointless.

Tbh it’s an interesting debate but seriously who cares how big the jump or fall is between divisions. A lot depends on the circumstances on and off the field at each individual example

 

[Casey]

I will agree each division has its level but as a rule of thumb the bottom of a division is on a par with mid table in the division below and the top of the table is on a par with mid table in the division above.

What I noticed on the rise to league one and drop back to league two was the speed of the attack increases as you go further up. One second you are in good position the next you are frantically defending your box. Not counter attacking as such just the ability to move the ball at pace increases and also the ruthlessness of teams is more noticeable. Mistakes are punished.

Casey