Sova

Tyne and Wear alone has a population of over 1 million. I posted about this a while back, but, regarding catchment areas, it's misleading to use the populations of the cities proper. People have studied this https://www.statsmapsnpix.com/2021/01/which-football-team-is-nearest-me.html?m=1 and the results are eye-opening, especially compared to lists where Sheffield is 4th or 5th biggest city in the country. Scroll down that article for a link to a spreadsheet showing how many people each club is the nearest for. We do terribly, but that's because of how Sheffield itself is split. However, even Sheffield's population combined is less than that for many clubs. For urban areas, we have: Liverpool: 2.1 million for 3 league teams, one of which is Tranmere; Manchester 3.5m/7, W. Yorks 2.1m/3, W. Mids, including Coventry, 4m/6, NE 2.8m/3, London 10m/12, Bristol 1.5/2. So generally 700-750k per club. (The study was done a few years ago, and the precise numbers vary depending in which teams are in the league.) Manchester is a bit less, but the two big teams get around that on their own. Sheffield? 750k split between 2 teams. S. Yorks? 1.8m split between 5. Then you have all the clubs that are the only league team in their county. Obviously, a big population to draw from is no guarantee of, or prerequisite for, success, but if anything it makes it even clearer just how good our support is. Personally, I agree 35k wouldn't be enough, and I'd also start with around 40-45k with scope to expand.

Indeed, especially going by the wider metropolitan area rather than the city proper. A few seasons ago, some people did a study on this https://www.statsmapsnpix.com/2021/01/which-football-team-is-nearest-me.html?m=1, and found how many people each team is the closest to. Scroll down for a link to a spreadsheet with the figures. The second tab is for the top 4 divisions. We come 87th, but that's only because of the way Sheffield is split. Much more relevant are the figures for Sheffield compared to other conurbations. Basically, what other urban areas have per club, Sheffield has to split between two clubs (and the season referred to in the study was a good one for Sheffield in this regard because Chesterfield weren't in the league). And while the general point might not be news to anyone, it's still eye-opening to see the figures.

By which I mean seasons.

I agree we have lots of potential and could and should be doing much, much better. But even before the Premier League we weren't that great - we spent around half the previous 50 years outside the top flight and averaged 30K 10 times. So in the last 100 years we've had more seasons outside the top flight than in it. A third of our top-flight seasons came before WWI. Of course, you can wonder what might have happened if the club had been run properly over the years and had decent investment, but that's where we are.

But we don't though. Not over the long term. Sure, we might average 40K if we ever got back into the Premier League, but as soon as the novelty wore off it'd drop down again. Villa haven't averaged under 30K for 30 years. We haven't averaged over 30K for nearly 60. Yes, Sheffield is a relatively big city, but that's it. As soon as you get out of it, you hit other towns with their own football league team. There's no Gateshead on our doorstep, no Wakefield or Solihull or Worthing. We're not the only team in our county, like Brighton or Norwich. Compare the Birmingham area with South Yorkshire, for example. Both have 5 teams, but Birmingham has twice the population and has been able to sustain those teams at a higher level than South Yorkshire has its. The Sheffield area doesn't have the population to sustain two successful teams (plus three other less successful ones) for any significant length of time. In fact, very few cities in Europe of Sheffield's size do, and those tend to be from smaller countries where they regularly win things.

In 2004/2005, we won virtually game in January and February, stumbled a bit at the end of the season, but went up in the playoffs after scoring in the last minute of extra time in the final. In 2022/2023, we won virtually game in January and February, stumbled a bit at the end of the season, but went up in the playoffs after scoring in the last minute of extra time in the final. In 2005/2006, we started the season terribly and were in the relegation zone at Christmas, but recovered in the second half to stay up with over 50 points, including winning 3 of the last 4 games. In 2023/2024, we started the season terribly and were in the relegation zone at Christmas, but recovered in the second half to stay up with over 50 points, including winning 3 of the last 4 games. In 2006/2007, we looked all set for a mid-table finish in February, but had a tremendous end to the season and ... just fell short of the playoffs. In 2024/2005...?

The Chatster, not for the first time, is talking testicles here. Birmingham had 38 points after 34 games last season.

We didn't want to win this anyway.

Some people claim the cup is dying and people aren't interested in it any more, but most of this round's attendances have been pretty good. I hate to praise them, but Leeds got 35,000 for a game that was on TV. That's more than double the attendance of the two Sheffield teams combined in their most recent home 3rd round fixtures.

It's not just about the money with the replays. Previously, if you got drawn away that was balanced out a bit by the fact that you if you could a replay you'd have a potential 120 minutes at home, rather than the 90 away in the first game. But now, not only do you not get that, the team lucky enough to be drawn at home originally get the extra time period as well.

Is this AI hallucinating? They had plenty of penalties in that time. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/2007–08_Bristol_Rovers_F.C._season

IIRC, we got 0 for financial sustainability in 2023 by default because we hadn't filed our accounts. If you ignore that factor, we've barely improved at all.

Bundesliga 2 averaged 29k last season. The Tories would be proud of this twaddle from the EFL.

I was thinking "What a great example of nominative determinism" until I realised I'd misread the thread title.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Glasgow_Football_Association#:~:text=after its formation.-,Glasgow v Sheffield,12 draws. Observations: 1) Glasgow's overall superiority is due to their dominance pre-1890. 2) These weren't close-season friendlies, but actually took place in mid-season, sometimes just a couple of days after a league game. 3) Attendances don't seem to have been that great.

How about banning headers but allowing outfield players to handle (but not catch or hold) the ball in their own half?

Up to 98/99. Mostly only live broadcasts from 90/91.

This, apparently, shows all the times we've been on TV: http://carousel.royalwebhosting.net/itv/ITVpyrmid.html?18630000SHW

Amazing achievement by Leverkusen. Meanwhile, a little to the northwest, Eindhoven's season in the Dutch league has been rather overshadowed by it, but they finished with 1 more point, also from 34 games, and with a goal difference of +90.

So far, 3 teams have had more penalties in the play-offs than we had in the entire season.

They're now in the nervous 90s

I know what you mean. If Birmingham win, it wouldn't take a crazy set of results for us to go down on 51 points. Still, no point thinking about it too much.

Now just us

Exactly. And as bad as we are, we're not the worst team for touches in the opposition box, and even if there haven't been that many obvious incidents, we've still been unlucky that not one opposition player has stuck an arm out to a cross, or mistimed a tackle in the area, or whatever.