Choice, I feel Portsmouth (2 titles + 2 FACups) slightly bigger than us. WestHam definitely bigger than Fulham (trophies, fanbase , yrs in top tier). Blackpool and Preston's sleeping giant status maybe debatable. Your post shows you rate recent succes higher than I do, which means you are younger than me. That said, I totally agree with all the rest.
[cite]Posted By: adrian[/cite]Choice, I feel Portsmouth (2 titles + 2 FACups) slightly bigger than us. WestHam definitely bigger than Fulham (trophies, fanbase , yrs in top tier).
Blackpool and Preston's sleeping giant status maybe debatable. Your post shows you rate recent succes higher than I do, which means you are younger than me. That said, I totally agree with all the rest.
The reason i rate recent success higher than success from say 50s, 60s, 70s, 80s is because the game has changed so much.
Take into account fitness levels, advanced skill, better pitches, more matches, expectancy levels and the incentive of the money in the game and I believe a team like Stoke City/Sunderland or Birmingham today for example would batter Uniteds Busby Babes
I think to get promoted these days is far harder and stressful than ever known before especially with so few clubs vying for that pot of gold in the Premiership.
Players used to play football for their club and country for love, have a beer afterwards, had loyalty, played with a smile on their faces which was great....im all for bringing back the terraces, crap pitches and stadia and a lot of the old things that made the game great...these days its a souless sport ruined by The Premiership/Sky/Talk Sport and Betting
Choice, that last post of yours is the best i've read in this forum. It expresses my feelings in far better words that I could ever have used. Cheers mate.
[cite]Posted By: adrian[/cite]Choice, I feel Portsmouth (2 titles + 2 FACups) slightly bigger than us. WestHam definitely bigger than Fulham (trophies, fanbase , yrs in top tier).
Blackpool and Preston's sleeping giant status maybe debatable. Your post shows you rate recent succes higher than I do, which means you are younger than me. That said, I totally agree with all the rest.
The reason i rate recent success higher than success from say 50s, 60s, 70s, 80s is because the game has changed so much.
So, er, using that, how are Millwall below teams like Swansea, Bristol, Notts County, etc!
Last decade has seen 1 league title, 4th place in championship, 1 FA Cup Final appearance and 1 UEFA Cup appearance. That's not bad.
I'd have us lower end of the 2nd tier to be honest based on the last 25 years or so. Going further, bottom 5 of 2nd/top 10 of 3rd tier.
[cite]Posted By: Numbers[/cite]I like what you have done Adrian, I did something similar in May, the day Millwall got promoted in fact. Once I started receiving texts from mates asking what division we are in, I tried to remember the last time they were in a division higher than us, i couldn't ! So I looked back on the net, it was 1975. I then compared us to Millwall over the years the results made me feel better that day, still do as well.
We have been 2 divisions higher than MFC 19 times
1 division higher than MFC 26 times
in the same division as MFC 32 times
1 division lower than MFC 6 times
2 division lower than MFC 0 times
This shows (the obvious) that we are historically much more successful/bigger than them.
In fact the last time we were a div below them (1975) we got promoted and they got relegated and the status quo was resumed.
I haven't had time to do the same thing with other teams but will do soon, Palace QPR etc.
Good to see you're so bothered about the relative size of our two clubs. God knows why. What happens on the pitch when we play eachother is what counts.
West Ham always have been and always will be bigger than us, we won't give a stuff about that, but the results when we do play matter.
Likewise none of us really care if over our history you've generally been bigger than us. What does matter is that we beat you more than you beat us. And for a club supposedly as much bigger than us, probably makes it harder for you to take.
Sparrows, we are rivals that is the reason. You are right about games against each other, but i just wanted to use statistics to make me feel better. If we were to lose both games to you in a season but won the majority of the rest and got promoted i'd be more than happy with that. On average we have been higher than you and it is only a matter of time until we are again.I am not obsessed about this though I'd much rather be above Palace. I have a lot of Millwall mates and the rivalry good with Palace it's different.
Does it really matter? said a poster on here, I think it is interesting to consider which clubs are considered big and which are small by my fellow fans and to look at Charltons place in all that- so to me the answer is yes. In these days of League 1 football no harm is done by feeling a little superior to some other clubs! I feel our 8 years out of 9 at the top table stand for something and have enhanced our reputation in the game and that is why lots of players still see us as a step up and why fans of other clubs see us as a big scalp. We have history and status in football it's just our present position that needs fixing.
I still do not understand this thread really. There are 3 ways of looking at it - past, present and future. In the distant past (1950s), we were quite big, since then we have been a second division-type of side that has moved slightly above this and slightly below this. At present, we are where we are. In the future, I don't know. I would like to think that it will be upwards, but other previously succesful clubs have gone down further - Hull, Burnley, Oxford United, Notts County to name a few. The only thing that matters is where we are now and, if we are all honest, we are where we should be - upper half of the third division.
There's nothing to understand, it is a just a question that invites peoples thoughts on Charlton's standing in the game despite two relegations. Some can't see the point in the question- for others it's interesting. Your history and status make you what you are, your league placing is temporary.
[cite]Posted By: pilchard[/cite]There's nothing to understand, it is a just a question that invites peoples thoughts on Charlton's standing in the game despite two relegations. Some can't see the point in the question for others it's interesting. Your history and status make you what you are, your league placing is temporary.
[cite]Posted By: pilchard[/cite]There's nothing to understand, it is a just a question that invites peoples thoughts on Charlton's standing in the game despite two relegations. Some can't see the point in the question for others it's interesting. Your history and status make you what you are, your league placing is temporary.
But league placing contributes to your history and status...
[cite]Posted By: pilchard[/cite]There's nothing to understand, it is a just a question that invites peoples thoughts on Charlton's standing in the game despite two relegations. Some can't see the point in the question for others it's interesting. Your history and status make you what you are, your league placing is temporary.
But league placing contributes to your history and status...
Indeed it does and if we were to spend the next 100 years at this level we would be viewed somewhat differently but my feeling is that as Charlton have spent last 25 years or so in the top 2 divisions and nearly half that in the top division including 8 seasons in the premier, statistically we have spent very little time at the level we currently occupy and hopefully that will be rectified sooner rather than later, football being the way it is we should eventually rise again.
3 seasons in League 1 and 7 outside the top flight have done little to diminish Leeds status as a big club and they are still generally regarded as a big club, we are not that big obviously but we are respectably large enough. It's easy to forget that- as we have been so high for so long we have fallen harder than if we were yo-yo-ing between Championship and League 1, many ex Premier league clubs have fallen through the Championship after failing to adjust we weren't the first and won't be the last- sadly.
[cite]Posted By: pilchard[/cite]There's nothing to understand, it is a just a question that invites peoples thoughts on Charlton's standing in the game despite two relegations. Some can't see the point in the question for others it's interesting. Your history and status make you what you are, your league placing is temporary.
Funny posting really, if I remember a lot of our supporters thought we were as big as Spurs and bigger than West Ham when we were once in the premiership, keeping above them in league position, though in all honesty we were not even a bit of shite on their shoes through support structure history or finances.
You are as big as you get or as small as you become...(Vice versa)
Pretty darned hillarious posting imo lol etc! I was not one of those fans who thought we were bigger than the likes of West Ham and Spurs, I do think that if we manage to rebuild reasonably successfully over the next few years then we could one day return to being a respectably placed top flight outfit, it won't be overnight but it can be done, in the meanwhile I stand by the view that we are one of the bigger clubs outside the top tier with potential for better.
Mid league one, everyone above us , is .. above us...
I think we are gonna have to get used to this for a while... and to be fair i thik we are gonna have to go into administation and hope we come out to get on an even footing again...
its a mess, Im depressed and there is nothing wwe can do about it....
let's hope we get the results moving forward...
the good news is WAGSTAFF Im starting to love the guy... apart from that I just want to take a gun to paces ike Tranmere and sniper off al the c**** that kick our players....
Comments
Blackpool and Preston's sleeping giant status maybe debatable. Your post shows you rate recent succes higher than I do, which means you are younger than me. That said, I totally agree with all the rest.
The reason i rate recent success higher than success from say 50s, 60s, 70s, 80s is because the game has changed so much.
Take into account fitness levels, advanced skill, better pitches, more matches, expectancy levels and the incentive of the money in the game and I believe a team like Stoke City/Sunderland or Birmingham today for example would batter Uniteds Busby Babes
I think to get promoted these days is far harder and stressful than ever known before especially with so few clubs vying for that pot of gold in the Premiership.
So, er, using that, how are Millwall below teams like Swansea, Bristol, Notts County, etc!
Last decade has seen 1 league title, 4th place in championship, 1 FA Cup Final appearance and 1 UEFA Cup appearance. That's not bad.
I'd have us lower end of the 2nd tier to be honest based on the last 25 years or so. Going further, bottom 5 of 2nd/top 10 of 3rd tier.
Good to see you're so bothered about the relative size of our two clubs. God knows why. What happens on the pitch when we play eachother is what counts.
West Ham always have been and always will be bigger than us, we won't give a stuff about that, but the results when we do play matter.
Likewise none of us really care if over our history you've generally been bigger than us. What does matter is that we beat you more than you beat us. And for a club supposedly as much bigger than us, probably makes it harder for you to take.
You've got to win a lot of games to pull back the most one sided rivalry in England and be able to brag again.
Cons club , they have places all over, and the Lib club ,,,,,,,Darby & Joan ????
spot on
But league placing contributes to your history and status...
Indeed it does and if we were to spend the next 100 years at this level we would be viewed somewhat differently but my feeling is that as Charlton have spent last 25 years or so in the top 2 divisions and nearly half that in the top division including 8 seasons in the premier, statistically we have spent very little time at the level we currently occupy and hopefully that will be rectified sooner rather than later, football being the way it is we should eventually rise again.
3 seasons in League 1 and 7 outside the top flight have done little to diminish Leeds status as a big club and they are still generally regarded as a big club, we are not that big obviously but we are respectably large enough. It's easy to forget that- as we have been so high for so long we have fallen harder than if we were yo-yo-ing between Championship and League 1, many ex Premier league clubs have fallen through the Championship after failing to adjust we weren't the first and won't be the last- sadly.
So, are we a big club or not then?
This insight has changed my life. ;-)
You are as big as you get or as small as you become...(Vice versa)
Well done IA.
So do beatings by Watford
I think we are gonna have to get used to this for a while... and to be fair i thik we are gonna have to go into administation and hope we come out to get on an even footing again...
its a mess, Im depressed and there is nothing wwe can do about it....
let's hope we get the results moving forward...
the good news is WAGSTAFF Im starting to love the guy... apart from that I just want to take a gun to paces ike Tranmere and sniper off al the c**** that kick our players....