I was having a conversation with a Villa fan, and he said that most clubs never really move from their true level. He used Swindon as an example and said if you think of Swindon you generally think of the third tier. He said (and he wasn't trying to rub my nose in it) that we were a similar entity. Clearly I pointed out the error of his ways...but he went on to say if he imagined all the clubs in the football league he'd rank us about 28th. (Villa 7th..so clearly he's wrong there) Of course there are lots of things you can measure, gates, trophies, length in top flight, history, ground etc, etc.
Where do you think we sit....
I think about 17th or 18th
Here's a quick question for you? No googling!
Who won the Charity Shield in 1971 and what was so strange about it?
It was Leicester I think? Someone at work mentioned it. Can't remember the reason.
It was Leicester I think? Someone at work mentioned it. Can't remember the reason.
To be fair, your mate's probably not far off the mark.
It was against Wimbledon in the early to mid 90s. Can't remember the year off the top of my head.
Oh dear. I suppose none of this matters in the scheme of things, but the idea we are in the same bracket as Swindon (historically) is just laughable. If that's how low our expectations have fallen, if that is the sort of company that some people think we should be keeping then this club is doomed. I want and expect better than this, but it seems some people think we have found our level.
what do you think our level is then? Considering since we started as a club?
We ought to be a club that yo-yos between the top 2 divisions. I just feel we should not accept being a 3 tier club. There are clubs who are very happy to be playing in the 3rd tier, we shouldn't be. Leave that to the likes of Bury, Crawley and Stevanage. It is not 'our level', we haven't been there for 50 years and we should be busting a gut to get out of this league.
Norwich, Leicester, Wednesday, Forest, Southampton, Leeds etc didn't consider it their level and they got out of it pretty quick, and their fans expected nothing less. Not saying it should be this season or even next, but under no circumstances should we start believing this is where we belong long term, and if you start putting us in the same bracket as Swindon then that is what you are doing.
Don't anybody is saying that we should be a third-tier club(Though historically we are more likely to be placed there), but probably about mid-way in the second tier, more likely to be a yo-yo club from third to second, not second to third.
Our run in the top flight should be seen more as the anomoly it is, rather than an expectation.
Oh dear. I suppose none of this matters in the scheme of things, but the idea we are in the same bracket as Swindon (historically) is just laughable. If that's how low our expectations have fallen, if that is the sort of company that some people think we should be keeping then this club is doomed. I want and expect better than this, but it seems some people think we have found our level.
The only real measure of where we rank in English football has to be attendances really, and historically we average more than Derby, Forest, Norwich, Southampton, Stoke and Ipswich
How can the size of a club be based upon attendances? Are you from Leicester?
You would find it hard to find other fans who don't wear skyblue glasses to agree that we are bigger than all of those clubs.
Not sure what you are basing that on, and we'll have to agree to disagree I suppose.
The only real measure of where we rank in English football has to be attendances really, and historically we average more than Derby, Forest, Norwich, Southampton, Stoke and Ipswich and I don't see anyone suggesting they are all clubs that should yo-yo between the second and third tier, but perhaps you think they should.
To be honest the club have got to try getting in the communities more..get the young up and coming football fans into Coventry instead of man utd ,Liverpool, Chelsea etc.it actually makes me sick seeing kids with Chelsea top on .as 15 years ago you wouldn't see that.can't see the joy of supporting a club you have no intention of watching and think ruud gullit still plays in the starting 11 lol
I think a successful Aston Villa would be 7th or 8th. They have a huge fan base but like us in a way haven't really achieved anything like their potential for years and with the arabs and oligarts throwing money at certain clubs they are pushed downwards. Chelsea and Man City have leap frogged them but if Villa had a team like either of those two Villa park would be a sell out every match you can't say that at Chelski or Man City.
I remember Villa in division three and division two getting 50000 crowds regular, that was in the mid 70s.
Order of clubs in my opinion would be :
Manchester United
Liverpool
Arsenal
Tottenham
Chelski
Manchester City
Aston Villa
Newcastle
Everton
Sunderland
Don't anybody is saying that we should be a third-tier club(Though historically we are more likely to be placed there), but probably about mid-way in the second tier, more likely to be a yo-yo club from third to second, not second to third.
Our run in the top flight should be seen more as the anomoly it is, rather than an expectation.
I was having a conversation with a Villa fan, and he said that most clubs never really move from their true level. He used Swindon as an example and said if you think of Swindon you generally think of the third tier. He said (and he wasn't trying to rub my nose in it) that we were a similar entity. Clearly I pointed out the error of his ways...but he went on to say if he imagined all the clubs in the football league he'd rank us about 28th. (Villa 7th..so clearly he's wrong there) Of course there are lots of things you can measure, gates, trophies, length in top flight, history, ground etc, etc.
Where do you think we sit....
I think about 17th or 18th
Sunderland and stoke???? Whynewcastle everton sunderland are all above villa now and stoke.
and liverpool are below arsenal spurs city and chelsea now (sadly)
We've spent less time in the third division (22 seasons) than either the second division (29 seasons) or the top flight (34 seasons).
We've actually spent more time in the top flight than in any other league.
Source: http://www.european-football-statistics.co.uk/england.htm
If we are relative newcomers regarding the top flight so not worthy, what about Lverpool in this, was it 1965 when they made it
PUSB
The problem with a lot of locally based Cov fans is that they let their dislike for Villa cloud rational thought. Villa are clearly around the 7th or 8th biggest club in the country based on fan base and trophies. For the first 30-40 years of the football league's existence they were clearly number one.
As for Cov, my guess would be around 30th. As stated by other posters we achieved nothing prior to Jimmy Hill arrived at the club. 34 years in the top flight counts for a lot but not enough to give us any designs on claiming a top 20 place overall.
I don't really see how Villa has anything to do with this? I don't really give a crap about Villa: it was never a proper derby-game, and it only became one as there was nobody else vaguely local in the top flight for us to play! And that used to annoy my two Villa supporting mates at the time, as they didn't consider us much of a derby (maybe as much as Walsall is to us?). Before our top flight era, they certainly weren't considered our bitter rivals.
For the first 40 years of the Football League they were clearly number one? Not in the slightest; they were the team of the 1890's, for sure, with 5 title wins, but they didn't win any before that and their next one was in 1981! The reality of their position now in terms of gates, league position and financial power is that they are a lower-midtable top flight team, no way near the top 6. If history was that relevant to league position, PNE and Huddersfield fans must be very frustrated..
More fans than Derby or Forest?? You really must be talking 'historically' for that to be the case. If only it were true.
I'd say that's just about right Grendel. As for all those who say City had a bigger attendance in the 1960's and 70's - look at the cost! I remember as a young teenager in the late 60's, going up HR and using my meagre pocket money to get in AND still have some left over for sweets etc! You need a bleedin' bank loan to get in nowadays!
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?