i said to mates yesterday i think we are a 10th in the championship team
very good home support and non league away support(in numbers)
so gutted we're gonna be down in the third tier but i'm charlton till i die FACT
[cite]Posted By: ShootersHillGuru[/cite]I sort of agree MCS that clubs do have a natural level. Man U, Spurs are top flight. Norwich are a typical 2nd teir club. Charlton I feel are a 2nd teir team also. With our recent achievments in the premiership we should not drop below that. Is that over expectation.
I think there are no "natural" levels. Clubs that were always in the top tier in my youth are now in the third. Wigan and Fulham are in the Prem. Wimbledon were and are now non-league. MK Dons could be one step from the top flight. Sure money means some teams stick around in the same place for a long while but for many others there are a lot of ladders to climb or snakes to fall down.
Charlton have been an established top tier team twice, under Seed and under Curbs. It has happened before and it CAN happen again. Maybe not for years or decades but I have to hope.
And well said Chirpy Jnr. May you stay forever young.
I support a club not a division as well Henry but I think that the notion of clubs having "natural" levels might have more support than you think inho of course.
Season 1961 / 2 English First Division. of 22 teams 12 are still in the upper teir of English football and 9 of the others are currently in the Championship. Leaving only one team - Leicester out of sinc.
Just looked up at the season I was born (53/54). Every single club in div one that season except Huddersfield is still in the Prem (13 of them) or Championship (8).
Very few smaller clubs have broken into the big time for more than a season or two. Equally, there are not many examples of 'big' clubs falling into terminal decline. Looking at Charlton's first season in Div One (1936/7), of 22 teams, 18 are still in the Prem/Championship 72 seasons later (the exceptions, by the way, are Brentford, Grimsby, Huddersfield and Leeds).
Suggesting that teams have their natural place is a bit too deterministic for my liking.
Not all that long ago Coventry and Southampton were considered tier one sides. Thinking back into footballing history outfits like Blackpool, Preston etc were among the best in the land. Wimblesdon went from non-league to winning the FA Cup and then back again...A few years ago you'd never have believed that Wigan and Hull would be in the Premiership and in the case of Wigan survive several seasons without trouble. I wasn't that long ago that Man City were in the third tier etc.
What's evident is that there are some teams who have the resources to maintain a place at the top table, but for the rest of the footballing nation, including Charlton, teams have to work hard, invest well and be lucky. Did our luck simply run out?
Not done the research for this but I wonder if we looked at every league club and looked at which division they had played in the most would we be very surprised. Not that bored yet so just opinion.
[cite]Posted By: ShootersHillGuru[/cite]Not done the research for this but I wonder if we looked at every league club and looked at which division they had played in the most would we be very surprised. Not that bored yet so just opinion.
Just saying that Rochdale probably hold the record for being in one division the longest.
Rochdale - Since 1921 they have only been out of the bottom tier for five years in two stretches, one to the third tier for a year and again to the third tier for four years and stuck there since 1974 they have been!!!
My point really is there must be a stat for every club as to which division they have most frequented. If we saw that would we be surprised ? I dont think so.
I think your poiint is valid, BFR - it's the clubs with resources that entrench themselves in the top 2 divisions, especially because they are located in large centres of population.
Obviously Leeds have derailed recently through mis-management, Cardiff had fine representation in the top league until the mid-1960's, and Bristol has been the largest underachieving footballing city.
But, exceptions to every rule - some of these clubs, like Burnley and Wigan have had/are having an established run in the top league, yet only have populations around the 80 or 90,000 mark - about the same as Lincoln City.
Ipswich and Blackburn, not much over 100,000 population, have carved out a fine football history for themselves in relatively recent times - about the same size as Exeter.
Yet teams like York or Bournemouth (populations of around 170,000 or so) have never got anywhere near the top league ever. But they are more or less the same size as Middlesboro/Sunderland/Newcastle
Then Plymouth, population quarter million, the same size as Derby and Nottingham, has never been in the Premier, let alone won the European Cup, lol
I know it's stating the obvious Oggy but Derby and Forest had the phenomenal Clough/Taylor factor. In fact do certain clubs achieve stability/ enjoy success simply by having the right man in charge at the right time. We don't have to look too far for an example of this!
[cite]Posted By: March51[/cite]I know it's stating the obvious Oggy but Derby and Forest had the phenomenal Clough/Taylor factor. In fact do certain clubs achieve stability/ enjoy success simply by having the right man in charge at the right time. We don't have to look too far for an example of this!
Jimmy Seed you mean.
Sure some teams are still where they were 30, 40 or 50 years ago but that is a snap and other than a few very rich or very poor teams most have moved around. City, Villa, Stoke, Reading, Fulham, Hull, Sunderland, Birmingham have all been in Div 3 recently (maybe WBA too??)
And even clubs like Man Utd, Arsenal, Chelsea and Everton have had spells when they have not been dominant or winning trophies/playing in Europe. Liverpool spent a long time in Div 2 in the 50s.
You could argue that Leeds are back at their natural level as they were nothing much until Revie came in the early sixties and were mostly a Div 2 team where as Preston, Burnley and Blackpool were all big name Div one sides.
Ipswich are a great example. look for what division they were in 63 years ago when we ended our rise from Div 3 South to Div 1.
Where's MK Dons natural level?
Clincher for me is Wolves. What's their natural level. Oldies will say top Div 1 when they were "Champions of the World" in the 50s, 60s babies like me will say mid-Div 1, youngsters might say Div 2 but they were in Div 4 in the 80s and have only spent 1 year in the prem. But a big club in a one club city.
Anyway I've been a member longer than you lot and if it wasn't for me suggesting to Lookie that he speak to AFKA about his concept of an on-line community as it might fit in with AFKAs fanzine idea then there would be no Charlton Life so I am RIGHT and you are WRONG : - )
Populations are meaningless - it is their proximity to large metropolitian areas i.e. Manchester in the North etc etc... These attract and retain footballers - who would live in Lincoln or Exeter if they are young and have money to burn.....
Apologies to comrades living in or near these two places in advance!
[cite]Posted By: Rothko[/cite]MK Dons natural level is a footballing grave
Deserved maybe.
My point was that there is no natural level for them or most clubs. If they go up again their crowds will increase again and a sustained period in Divs 1 and 2 will allow them to build them further. They have the catchment area and the Stadium plus the finance. Luton are in decline which helps them as well.
Like them or loathe them it's an interesting experiment.
There might be something in the location argument - Roy Keane said earlier in the season that he had difficulty attracting players to Sunderland and you need to have access to a large population base to draw your support from.
Ultimately though it comes down to ambition and whether those in charge have the drive and determination to build their clubs up and win things. A case in point was Scally complaining when we launched Valley Express that we were stealing Gillingham's fans. Nonsense of course - we were guilty only of good marketing and weren't doing anything that he could have done, just as he could have re-developed the Priestfield and launched a target 10,000 campaign. We did and reaped the rewards, while he chose not to invest.
Henry pointed out that: ''City, Villa, Stoke, Reading, Fulham, Hull, Sunderland, Birmingham have all been in Div 3 recently''.
But what was notable when clubs like Birmingham, Sunderland, Man City and Villa went down to div three is that it was their first time in that tier. Sunderland, Birmingham and City came back up in one season. Villa in two, I think. Their 'natural level' over their entire history has been bouncing around between divs one and two , and a season in div three was in most cases a once in a century blip (OK, I think it happened to Brum twice, but they came straight back up in one go on both occasions).
I'd like to believe that bouncing around between one and two is our 'natural level', too, and that like City, Brum, Sunderland etc. div three will be a one-season blip!
[cite]Posted By: SilentAddick[/cite]Populations are meaningless - it is their proximity to large metropolitian areas i.e. Manchester in the North etc etc... These attract and retain footballers - who would live in Lincoln or Exeter if they are young and have money to burn.....
Apologies to comrades living in or near these two places in advance!
Exeter is a very nice city in a lovely part of the world (sh!t ground though :-))
[cite]Posted By: Rothko[/cite]MK Dons natural level is a footballing grave
Deserved maybe.
My point was that there is no natural level for them or most clubs. If they go up again their crowds will increase again and a sustained period in Divs 1 and 2 will allow them to build them further. They have the catchment area and the Stadium plus the finance. Luton are in decline which helps them as well.
Like them or loathe them it's an interesting experiment.
One not seen since two clubs from south east London moved home, one went on to greater and greater success never to be relegated (with the odd scandalous, back hander to keep that record); the other lasted less than a season and vrtually bankrupted the club.
Comments
very good home support and non league away support(in numbers)
so gutted we're gonna be down in the third tier but i'm charlton till i die FACT
Which is why we all started going in the first place.
Being there with your mates always used to be more important than some soon forgotten result, right ....?
HERE HERE!!!
I think there are no "natural" levels. Clubs that were always in the top tier in my youth are now in the third. Wigan and Fulham are in the Prem. Wimbledon were and are now non-league. MK Dons could be one step from the top flight. Sure money means some teams stick around in the same place for a long while but for many others there are a lot of ladders to climb or snakes to fall down.
Charlton have been an established top tier team twice, under Seed and under Curbs. It has happened before and it CAN happen again. Maybe not for years or decades but I have to hope.
And well said Chirpy Jnr. May you stay forever young.
I SUPPORT A CLUB, NOT A DIVISION.
of 22 teams 12 are still in the upper teir of English football and 9 of the others are currently in the Championship. Leaving only one team - Leicester out of sinc.
Do things really change that much I wonder.
Just looked up at the season I was born (53/54). Every single club in div one that season except Huddersfield is still in the Prem (13 of them) or Championship (8).
Very few smaller clubs have broken into the big time for more than a season or two. Equally, there are not many examples of 'big' clubs falling into terminal decline. Looking at Charlton's first season in Div One (1936/7), of 22 teams, 18 are still in the Prem/Championship 72 seasons later (the exceptions, by the way, are Brentford, Grimsby, Huddersfield and Leeds).
Not all that long ago Coventry and Southampton were considered tier one sides. Thinking back into footballing history outfits like Blackpool, Preston etc were among the best in the land. Wimblesdon went from non-league to winning the FA Cup and then back again...A few years ago you'd never have believed that Wigan and Hull would be in the Premiership and in the case of Wigan survive several seasons without trouble. I wasn't that long ago that Man City were in the third tier etc.
What's evident is that there are some teams who have the resources to maintain a place at the top table, but for the rest of the footballing nation, including Charlton, teams have to work hard, invest well and be lucky. Did our luck simply run out?
Just saying that Rochdale probably hold the record for being in one division the longest.
Obviously Leeds have derailed recently through mis-management, Cardiff had fine representation in the top league until the mid-1960's, and Bristol has been the largest underachieving footballing city.
But, exceptions to every rule - some of these clubs, like Burnley and Wigan have had/are having an established run in the top league, yet only have populations around the 80 or 90,000 mark - about the same as Lincoln City.
Ipswich and Blackburn, not much over 100,000 population, have carved out a fine football history for themselves in relatively recent times - about the same size as Exeter.
Yet teams like York or Bournemouth (populations of around 170,000 or so) have never got anywhere near the top league ever. But they are more or less the same size as Middlesboro/Sunderland/Newcastle
Then Plymouth, population quarter million, the same size as Derby and Nottingham, has never been in the Premier, let alone won the European Cup, lol
Jimmy Seed you mean.
Sure some teams are still where they were 30, 40 or 50 years ago but that is a snap and other than a few very rich or very poor teams most have moved around. City, Villa, Stoke, Reading, Fulham, Hull, Sunderland, Birmingham have all been in Div 3 recently (maybe WBA too??)
And even clubs like Man Utd, Arsenal, Chelsea and Everton have had spells when they have not been dominant or winning trophies/playing in Europe. Liverpool spent a long time in Div 2 in the 50s.
You could argue that Leeds are back at their natural level as they were nothing much until Revie came in the early sixties and were mostly a Div 2 team where as Preston, Burnley and Blackpool were all big name Div one sides.
Ipswich are a great example. look for what division they were in 63 years ago when we ended our rise from Div 3 South to Div 1.
Where's MK Dons natural level?
Clincher for me is Wolves. What's their natural level. Oldies will say top Div 1 when they were "Champions of the World" in the 50s, 60s babies like me will say mid-Div 1, youngsters might say Div 2 but they were in Div 4 in the 80s and have only spent 1 year in the prem. But a big club in a one club city.
Anyway I've been a member longer than you lot and if it wasn't for me suggesting to Lookie that he speak to AFKA about his concept of an on-line community as it might fit in with AFKAs fanzine idea then there would be no Charlton Life so I am RIGHT and you are WRONG : - )
Apologies to comrades living in or near these two places in advance!
Deserved maybe.
My point was that there is no natural level for them or most clubs. If they go up again their crowds will increase again and a sustained period in Divs 1 and 2 will allow them to build them further. They have the catchment area and the Stadium plus the finance. Luton are in decline which helps them as well.
Like them or loathe them it's an interesting experiment.
Ultimately though it comes down to ambition and whether those in charge have the drive and determination to build their clubs up and win things. A case in point was Scally complaining when we launched Valley Express that we were stealing Gillingham's fans. Nonsense of course - we were guilty only of good marketing and weren't doing anything that he could have done, just as he could have re-developed the Priestfield and launched a target 10,000 campaign. We did and reaped the rewards, while he chose not to invest.
That's OK, don't mention it.
Afka and lookie never do either the ungrateful sods : - )
But what was notable when clubs like Birmingham, Sunderland, Man City and Villa went down to div three is that it was their first time in that tier. Sunderland, Birmingham and City came back up in one season. Villa in two, I think. Their 'natural level' over their entire history has been bouncing around between divs one and two , and a season in div three was in most cases a once in a century blip (OK, I think it happened to Brum twice, but they came straight back up in one go on both occasions).
I'd like to believe that bouncing around between one and two is our 'natural level', too, and that like City, Brum, Sunderland etc. div three will be a one-season blip!
Exeter is a very nice city in a lovely part of the world (sh!t ground though :-))
One not seen since two clubs from south east London moved home, one went on to greater and greater success never to be relegated (with the odd scandalous, back hander to keep that record); the other lasted less than a season and vrtually bankrupted the club.