Yes, but other clubs who have had worse owners and gone through rougher times than us did not have as many jumping ship and a lot jumped back on the minute someone decent took over. Can’t understand why more do not want to be associated with a chairman who is like a breath of fresh air.
Sounds like my brother in law. He's from Scarborough. He used to get free tickets to Bellend Road, through his job. He went say a dozen times. Last time about 15 years ago. Now thinks he's a massive Leeds fan. Don't get me wrong, he's a decent bloke.
Because as others have said there isn't exactly this longstanding history of overall success. We've only really found it in the last 20 years since Peter Taylor. Teams like Derby that are now struggling in league 1 have had a comparatively successful past so there is some of the older generation bleeding in the new. My generation that has grown up with success since Peter Taylor is now getting there but its still a mixed bag.
He was a decent bloke On the morning they went away,I got up at 7a.m for a coffee and they'd left a stack of cold beers on my outside table...Needless to say I switched the kettle off.
You once said 260 miles away? Are you John,my next door neighbour. (If so,it was me and my hoe that weeded outside your front door today).
Come to think of it...I'll maybe ask him if he wants to take Godzilla dancing at the Barrowlands Ballroom
I think the big factor determining whether your club has a big, local support base is whether or not your club were ‘big’ or successful before the establishment of the Premier League and Sky getting its talons into English football. Derby, Forest, Boro, Sunderland, both Sheffield clubs to name a few were all established clubs in the top flight and/or won major honours before 1992, so their loyal support base has continued through the generations to the present day. We first got promoted to the top flight in 2008 after Sky commercialised English football on a global sale. This also plays a part in the ‘proper club’ vs ‘tinpot club’ debate. If your club was successful, ‘big’ or in the top flight for a while pre-Sky like Leeds, Forest, Sunderland, Derby etc. regardless of where they are now, it’s a ‘proper club’. If your success only came post-Sky, it’s considered ‘tinpot’. Chelsea have two Champions Leagues and Arsenal have none, but people still consider Arsenal the ‘bigger’ club because Chelsea’s success is more recent than Arsenal’s.
Nah...Got a Rod-the-mod style of mullet, back in the day....Doesn't tan well. Goes as pink as Barbies thingy.
Who suggested he wasn't a good player? I believe the comment was he wasn't good enough right now for what we needed, but could still be a good player in the future.
I think you’ve hit the nail on the head with the generational thing, though don’t agree with your timeline. I first got into watching football in the early 70’s. The teams who we are now describing in this thread as having the most loyal fan base in spite of current league position were pretty much fixtures in the top division in that era. All are medium sized cities. In the 60’s and 70’s it was still the ‘working class’ game. If you couldn’t afford it, you still followed your local team and would not likely to be woo’ed by teams you see on TV. It was probably at its peak in terms of that traditional support. As you say that would pass down the generations and with the population far less transient, and little other distraction, that fan base would likely grow almost exponentially through the generations. So with our low fan base in the early 70’s, we had a low starting point. Most felt that with our catchment area, if we were successful, the crowds would follow. It never happened and maybe linked to that 70’s starting point? It’s only my theory, any thoughts?
Still no Connolly or vinigre tits signing then? All this importance of a full pre season was clearly nonsense.
