It would be very difficult for someone to take the reins of a "beleaguered third tier team desperately in need of reinforcements, a still relatively inexperienced manager and coaching staff, a magnificent stadium that is coming up for some TLC and a training ground that is less than half way through a vital upgrade" and turn it into a club that regularly competes in Europe. However, there are some things that need to be borne in mind.
1. Thomas Sandgaard has done the impossible, by buying a club that wasn't allowed to be sold, agreeing a deal with a landlord it's impossible to do deals with and re-uniting and re-invigorating a desperate, bewildered and fractured fanbase. So the merely "very difficult" needn't be so much as a challenge for him.
2. Manchester City have done exactly the same. Within fifteen years of playing in the third tier, they had won their third Premier League title. If you told Thomas Sandgaard that Manchester City has exceeded that target, he would want to know why anyone thinks Charlton Athletic can't achieve it.
3. Leicester City moved from tier 3 to Premier League champions in seven years. If you told Thomas Sandgaard that Leicester City had exceeded the target in half the time, he would want to know why anyone thinks Charlton Athletic can't achieve it.
Set yourself an ambitious target and you may well miss it. But, would any current Charlton fan right now complain if within fifteen years we were "only" a mid-table, well-run, profitable Premier League team?
One more thing. To win games in fifteen years' time, we will need players who are about eight, nine or ten years old right now. Who are you going to sign for at that age? A team desperate to cling on to its L1 status, or a team with an ambitious owner, heading to take the club as high as it can?
I think that, under Thomas Sandgaard, every single stakeholder in Charlton Athletic - players, staff, supporters and ambitious, young footballers - is going to have to re-set their outlook. In the simplest terms, for the first time ever, kids playing for Charlton are going to have to make sure they have one extra piece of vital equipment before they can consider themselves a footballer. A passport.
Agree with most of this, the only caveat being that the Man.City and Leicester owners are 'considerably richer than TS' (to be said in a Black Country accent).
And both Man City and Leicester were clubs who could still draw (genuine) crowds of 25k plus, and in Man Cityās case considerably more, at third tier level.
Man City average attendance in the third tier since 1966 - 0. They've not been in the third tier since at least then.
Leicester City - League 1 average attendance 2008/2009 - 20,340.
It's only been around 31,500 in the premium loog. That's over 1000 spare seats even given their success.
Man City havenāt been in the third tier since 1966?. Hmmm, Iāve watched my team play at Man City in the third tier, and that was a long time after 1966, and there was 30k there that day!
And correct, the last time Leicester played in the third tier they averaged 20k (Charlton averaged 11k in the last three seasons they played in the third tier btw) , but they also drew 25.5k for a game and 30k for another, so as I correctly stated, Leicester could draw crowds of 25k plus while playing third tier football.
And as I say, these are genuine crowds.
Sorry, I must apologise for my fellow addicks, they forgot you and city were kicking around in the 3rd tier while we were in the premier league. You can throw that one back to me when your in the prem
Next season then? (You heard it here first š)
Done, you give a nifty to the up beats if you don't go up. I'll stand on south bermondsey Station in just a Charlton scarf if you do?
It would be very difficult for someone to take the reins of a "beleaguered third tier team desperately in need of reinforcements, a still relatively inexperienced manager and coaching staff, a magnificent stadium that is coming up for some TLC and a training ground that is less than half way through a vital upgrade" and turn it into a club that regularly competes in Europe. However, there are some things that need to be borne in mind.
1. Thomas Sandgaard has done the impossible, by buying a club that wasn't allowed to be sold, agreeing a deal with a landlord it's impossible to do deals with and re-uniting and re-invigorating a desperate, bewildered and fractured fanbase. So the merely "very difficult" needn't be so much as a challenge for him.
2. Manchester City have done exactly the same. Within fifteen years of playing in the third tier, they had won their third Premier League title. If you told Thomas Sandgaard that Manchester City has exceeded that target, he would want to know why anyone thinks Charlton Athletic can't achieve it.
3. Leicester City moved from tier 3 to Premier League champions in seven years. If you told Thomas Sandgaard that Leicester City had exceeded the target in half the time, he would want to know why anyone thinks Charlton Athletic can't achieve it.
Set yourself an ambitious target and you may well miss it. But, would any current Charlton fan right now complain if within fifteen years we were "only" a mid-table, well-run, profitable Premier League team?
One more thing. To win games in fifteen years' time, we will need players who are about eight, nine or ten years old right now. Who are you going to sign for at that age? A team desperate to cling on to its L1 status, or a team with an ambitious owner, heading to take the club as high as it can?
I think that, under Thomas Sandgaard, every single stakeholder in Charlton Athletic - players, staff, supporters and ambitious, young footballers - is going to have to re-set their outlook. In the simplest terms, for the first time ever, kids playing for Charlton are going to have to make sure they have one extra piece of vital equipment before they can consider themselves a footballer. A passport.
Agree with most of this, the only caveat being that the Man.City and Leicester owners are 'considerably richer than TS' (to be said in a Black Country accent).
And both Man City and Leicester were clubs who could still draw (genuine) crowds of 25k plus, and in Man Cityās case considerably more, at third tier level.
Man City average attendance in the third tier since 1966 - 0. They've not been in the third tier since at least then.
Leicester City - League 1 average attendance 2008/2009 - 20,340.
It's only been around 31,500 in the premium loog. That's over 1000 spare seats even given their success.
Man City havenāt been in the third tier since 1966?. Hmmm, Iāve watched my team play at Man City in the third tier, and that was a long time after 1966, and there was 30k there that day!
And correct, the last time Leicester played in the third tier they averaged 20k (Charlton averaged 11k in the last three seasons they played in the third tier btw) , but they also drew 25.5k for a game and 30k for another, so as I correctly stated, Leicester could draw crowds of 25k plus while playing third tier football.
And as I say, these are genuine crowds.
Sorry, I must apologise for my fellow addicks, they forgot you and city were kicking around in the 3rd tier while we were in the premier league. You can throw that one back to me when your in the prem
Next season then? (You heard it here first š)
Done, you give a nifty to the up beats if you don't go up. I'll stand on south bermondsey Station in just a Charlton scarf if you do?
It would be very difficult for someone to take the reins of a "beleaguered third tier team desperately in need of reinforcements, a still relatively inexperienced manager and coaching staff, a magnificent stadium that is coming up for some TLC and a training ground that is less than half way through a vital upgrade" and turn it into a club that regularly competes in Europe. However, there are some things that need to be borne in mind.
1. Thomas Sandgaard has done the impossible, by buying a club that wasn't allowed to be sold, agreeing a deal with a landlord it's impossible to do deals with and re-uniting and re-invigorating a desperate, bewildered and fractured fanbase. So the merely "very difficult" needn't be so much as a challenge for him.
2. Manchester City have done exactly the same. Within fifteen years of playing in the third tier, they had won their third Premier League title. If you told Thomas Sandgaard that Manchester City has exceeded that target, he would want to know why anyone thinks Charlton Athletic can't achieve it.
3. Leicester City moved from tier 3 to Premier League champions in seven years. If you told Thomas Sandgaard that Leicester City had exceeded the target in half the time, he would want to know why anyone thinks Charlton Athletic can't achieve it.
Set yourself an ambitious target and you may well miss it. But, would any current Charlton fan right now complain if within fifteen years we were "only" a mid-table, well-run, profitable Premier League team?
One more thing. To win games in fifteen years' time, we will need players who are about eight, nine or ten years old right now. Who are you going to sign for at that age? A team desperate to cling on to its L1 status, or a team with an ambitious owner, heading to take the club as high as it can?
I think that, under Thomas Sandgaard, every single stakeholder in Charlton Athletic - players, staff, supporters and ambitious, young footballers - is going to have to re-set their outlook. In the simplest terms, for the first time ever, kids playing for Charlton are going to have to make sure they have one extra piece of vital equipment before they can consider themselves a footballer. A passport.
Agree with most of this, the only caveat being that the Man.City and Leicester owners are 'considerably richer than TS' (to be said in a Black Country accent).
And both Man City and Leicester were clubs who could still draw (genuine) crowds of 25k plus, and in Man Cityās case considerably more, at third tier level.
Man City average attendance in the third tier since 1966 - 0. They've not been in the third tier since at least then.
Leicester City - League 1 average attendance 2008/2009 - 20,340.
It's only been around 31,500 in the premium loog. That's over 1000 spare seats even given their success.
Man City havenāt been in the third tier since 1966?. Hmmm, Iāve watched my team play at Man City in the third tier, and that was a long time after 1966, and there was 30k there that day!
And correct, the last time Leicester played in the third tier they averaged 20k (Charlton averaged 11k in the last three seasons they played in the third tier btw) , but they also drew 25.5k for a game and 30k for another, so as I correctly stated, Leicester could draw crowds of 25k plus while playing third tier football.
And as I say, these are genuine crowds.
Sorry, I must apologise for my fellow addicks, they forgot you and city were kicking around in the 3rd tier while we were in the premier league. You can throw that one back to me when your in the prem
Next season then? (You heard it here first š)
Done, you give a nifty to the up beats if you don't go up. I'll stand on south bermondsey Station in just a Charlton scarf if you do?
It would be very difficult for someone to take the reins of a "beleaguered third tier team desperately in need of reinforcements, a still relatively inexperienced manager and coaching staff, a magnificent stadium that is coming up for some TLC and a training ground that is less than half way through a vital upgrade" and turn it into a club that regularly competes in Europe. However, there are some things that need to be borne in mind.
1. Thomas Sandgaard has done the impossible, by buying a club that wasn't allowed to be sold, agreeing a deal with a landlord it's impossible to do deals with and re-uniting and re-invigorating a desperate, bewildered and fractured fanbase. So the merely "very difficult" needn't be so much as a challenge for him.
2. Manchester City have done exactly the same. Within fifteen years of playing in the third tier, they had won their third Premier League title. If you told Thomas Sandgaard that Manchester City has exceeded that target, he would want to know why anyone thinks Charlton Athletic can't achieve it.
3. Leicester City moved from tier 3 to Premier League champions in seven years. If you told Thomas Sandgaard that Leicester City had exceeded the target in half the time, he would want to know why anyone thinks Charlton Athletic can't achieve it.
Set yourself an ambitious target and you may well miss it. But, would any current Charlton fan right now complain if within fifteen years we were "only" a mid-table, well-run, profitable Premier League team?
One more thing. To win games in fifteen years' time, we will need players who are about eight, nine or ten years old right now. Who are you going to sign for at that age? A team desperate to cling on to its L1 status, or a team with an ambitious owner, heading to take the club as high as it can?
I think that, under Thomas Sandgaard, every single stakeholder in Charlton Athletic - players, staff, supporters and ambitious, young footballers - is going to have to re-set their outlook. In the simplest terms, for the first time ever, kids playing for Charlton are going to have to make sure they have one extra piece of vital equipment before they can consider themselves a footballer. A passport.
Agree with most of this, the only caveat being that the Man.City and Leicester owners are 'considerably richer than TS' (to be said in a Black Country accent).
And both Man City and Leicester were clubs who could still draw (genuine) crowds of 25k plus, and in Man Cityās case considerably more, at third tier level.
Man City average attendance in the third tier since 1966 - 0. They've not been in the third tier since at least then.
Leicester City - League 1 average attendance 2008/2009 - 20,340.
It's only been around 31,500 in the premium loog. That's over 1000 spare seats even given their success.
Man City havenāt been in the third tier since 1966?. Hmmm, Iāve watched my team play at Man City in the third tier, and that was a long time after 1966, and there was 30k there that day!
And correct, the last time Leicester played in the third tier they averaged 20k (Charlton averaged 11k in the last three seasons they played in the third tier btw) , but they also drew 25.5k for a game and 30k for another, so as I correctly stated, Leicester could draw crowds of 25k plus while playing third tier football.
And as I say, these are genuine crowds.
How do you know they were genuine crowd sizes? Bit of a leap of faith there..
It would be very difficult for someone to take the reins of a "beleaguered third tier team desperately in need of reinforcements, a still relatively inexperienced manager and coaching staff, a magnificent stadium that is coming up for some TLC and a training ground that is less than half way through a vital upgrade" and turn it into a club that regularly competes in Europe. However, there are some things that need to be borne in mind.
1. Thomas Sandgaard has done the impossible, by buying a club that wasn't allowed to be sold, agreeing a deal with a landlord it's impossible to do deals with and re-uniting and re-invigorating a desperate, bewildered and fractured fanbase. So the merely "very difficult" needn't be so much as a challenge for him.
2. Manchester City have done exactly the same. Within fifteen years of playing in the third tier, they had won their third Premier League title. If you told Thomas Sandgaard that Manchester City has exceeded that target, he would want to know why anyone thinks Charlton Athletic can't achieve it.
3. Leicester City moved from tier 3 to Premier League champions in seven years. If you told Thomas Sandgaard that Leicester City had exceeded the target in half the time, he would want to know why anyone thinks Charlton Athletic can't achieve it.
Set yourself an ambitious target and you may well miss it. But, would any current Charlton fan right now complain if within fifteen years we were "only" a mid-table, well-run, profitable Premier League team?
One more thing. To win games in fifteen years' time, we will need players who are about eight, nine or ten years old right now. Who are you going to sign for at that age? A team desperate to cling on to its L1 status, or a team with an ambitious owner, heading to take the club as high as it can?
I think that, under Thomas Sandgaard, every single stakeholder in Charlton Athletic - players, staff, supporters and ambitious, young footballers - is going to have to re-set their outlook. In the simplest terms, for the first time ever, kids playing for Charlton are going to have to make sure they have one extra piece of vital equipment before they can consider themselves a footballer. A passport.
Agree with most of this, the only caveat being that the Man.City and Leicester owners are 'considerably richer than TS' (to be said in a Black Country accent).
And both Man City and Leicester were clubs who could still draw (genuine) crowds of 25k plus, and in Man Cityās case considerably more, at third tier level.
Man City average attendance in the third tier since 1966 - 0. They've not been in the third tier since at least then.
Leicester City - League 1 average attendance 2008/2009 - 20,340.
It's only been around 31,500 in the premium loog. That's over 1000 spare seats even given their success.
Man City havenāt been in the third tier since 1966?. Hmmm, Iāve watched my team play at Man City in the third tier, and that was a long time after 1966, and there was 30k there that day!
And correct, the last time Leicester played in the third tier they averaged 20k (Charlton averaged 11k in the last three seasons they played in the third tier btw) , but they also drew 25.5k for a game and 30k for another, so as I correctly stated, Leicester could draw crowds of 25k plus while playing third tier football.
And as I say, these are genuine crowds.
How do you know they were genuine crowd sizes? Bit of a leap of faith there..
Yeah good point, they may have sold season tickets at dirt cheap prices and included those in the attendance figures even if the season tickets were used or not, or given thousands of tickets away to the local community, and included those in the attendance figures, even if they was used or not. But I just canāt see Leicester being the sort of club to have the need to do that.
How many comps to Millwall give to local community / schools ?
0 apparently, same goes for Leicester and Man City.
I admit they're bigger clubs with bigger fan bases, but that's more about lack of local opposition clubs.
If the South London clubs were one we'd have one club with 45,000 capacity in a bad season and probably over 60k as an average.
What an awful thought lol
and Man City lack local opposition clubs?? Really??
Anyway, my point wasnāt a snide dig. I just donāt think Charlton are as big a club as most of you on here think, Chizz being the prime example with that post of his. A medium sized club with a bit of potential yeah, but being talked about as if youāre in the same category as Man City, or even Leicester. Come on.
OohAah is about the only grounded one on here at the moment.
Anyway, can see Iām about as welcome as a fart on this thread so Iāll bid you farewell for now.
Congratulations on your takeover. Hopefully youāll be able to give us a game when we next meet, when ever that will be š
League clubs in:
Manchester: Man City or Man Utd... Wigan and Bolton at a stretch, then Rochdale, Oldham and Salford
London: Chelsea, Arsenal, Tottenham, Fulham, Charlton, Millwall, Palace, Brentford, Wimbledon, West Ham, QPR, Orient and Watford.
7 plays 13...
Yeah lack of local opposition clubs for fans to follow.
It would be very difficult for someone to take the reins of a "beleaguered third tier team desperately in need of reinforcements, a still relatively inexperienced manager and coaching staff, a magnificent stadium that is coming up for some TLC and a training ground that is less than half way through a vital upgrade" and turn it into a club that regularly competes in Europe. However, there are some things that need to be borne in mind.
1. Thomas Sandgaard has done the impossible, by buying a club that wasn't allowed to be sold, agreeing a deal with a landlord it's impossible to do deals with and re-uniting and re-invigorating a desperate, bewildered and fractured fanbase. So the merely "very difficult" needn't be so much as a challenge for him.
2. Manchester City have done exactly the same. Within fifteen years of playing in the third tier, they had won their third Premier League title. If you told Thomas Sandgaard that Manchester City has exceeded that target, he would want to know why anyone thinks Charlton Athletic can't achieve it.
3. Leicester City moved from tier 3 to Premier League champions in seven years. If you told Thomas Sandgaard that Leicester City had exceeded the target in half the time, he would want to know why anyone thinks Charlton Athletic can't achieve it.
Set yourself an ambitious target and you may well miss it. But, would any current Charlton fan right now complain if within fifteen years we were "only" a mid-table, well-run, profitable Premier League team?
One more thing. To win games in fifteen years' time, we will need players who are about eight, nine or ten years old right now. Who are you going to sign for at that age? A team desperate to cling on to its L1 status, or a team with an ambitious owner, heading to take the club as high as it can?
I think that, under Thomas Sandgaard, every single stakeholder in Charlton Athletic - players, staff, supporters and ambitious, young footballers - is going to have to re-set their outlook. In the simplest terms, for the first time ever, kids playing for Charlton are going to have to make sure they have one extra piece of vital equipment before they can consider themselves a footballer. A passport.
Agree with most of this, the only caveat being that the Man.City and Leicester owners are 'considerably richer than TS' (to be said in a Black Country accent).
And both Man City and Leicester were clubs who could still draw (genuine) crowds of 25k plus, and in Man Cityās case considerably more, at third tier level.
Man City average attendance in the third tier since 1966 - 0. They've not been in the third tier since at least then.
Leicester City - League 1 average attendance 2008/2009 - 20,340.
It's only been around 31,500 in the premium loog. That's over 1000 spare seats even given their success.
Man City havenāt been in the third tier since 1966?. Hmmm, Iāve watched my team play at Man City in the third tier, and that was a long time after 1966, and there was 30k there that day!
And correct, the last time Leicester played in the third tier they averaged 20k (Charlton averaged 11k in the last three seasons they played in the third tier btw) , but they also drew 25.5k for a game and 30k for another, so as I correctly stated, Leicester could draw crowds of 25k plus while playing third tier football.
And as I say, these are genuine crowds.
How do you know they were genuine crowd sizes? Bit of a leap of faith there..
It would be very difficult for someone to take the reins of a "beleaguered third tier team desperately in need of reinforcements, a still relatively inexperienced manager and coaching staff, a magnificent stadium that is coming up for some TLC and a training ground that is less than half way through a vital upgrade" and turn it into a club that regularly competes in Europe. However, there are some things that need to be borne in mind.
1. Thomas Sandgaard has done the impossible, by buying a club that wasn't allowed to be sold, agreeing a deal with a landlord it's impossible to do deals with and re-uniting and re-invigorating a desperate, bewildered and fractured fanbase. So the merely "very difficult" needn't be so much as a challenge for him.
2. Manchester City have done exactly the same. Within fifteen years of playing in the third tier, they had won their third Premier League title. If you told Thomas Sandgaard that Manchester City has exceeded that target, he would want to know why anyone thinks Charlton Athletic can't achieve it.
3. Leicester City moved from tier 3 to Premier League champions in seven years. If you told Thomas Sandgaard that Leicester City had exceeded the target in half the time, he would want to know why anyone thinks Charlton Athletic can't achieve it.
Set yourself an ambitious target and you may well miss it. But, would any current Charlton fan right now complain if within fifteen years we were "only" a mid-table, well-run, profitable Premier League team?
One more thing. To win games in fifteen years' time, we will need players who are about eight, nine or ten years old right now. Who are you going to sign for at that age? A team desperate to cling on to its L1 status, or a team with an ambitious owner, heading to take the club as high as it can?
I think that, under Thomas Sandgaard, every single stakeholder in Charlton Athletic - players, staff, supporters and ambitious, young footballers - is going to have to re-set their outlook. In the simplest terms, for the first time ever, kids playing for Charlton are going to have to make sure they have one extra piece of vital equipment before they can consider themselves a footballer. A passport.
Agree with most of this, the only caveat being that the Man.City and Leicester owners are 'considerably richer than TS' (to be said in a Black Country accent).
And both Man City and Leicester were clubs who could still draw (genuine) crowds of 25k plus, and in Man Cityās case considerably more, at third tier level.
Man City average attendance in the third tier since 1966 - 0. They've not been in the third tier since at least then.
Leicester City - League 1 average attendance 2008/2009 - 20,340.
It's only been around 31,500 in the premium loog. That's over 1000 spare seats even given their success.
Man City havenāt been in the third tier since 1966?. Hmmm, Iāve watched my team play at Man City in the third tier, and that was a long time after 1966, and there was 30k there that day!
And correct, the last time Leicester played in the third tier they averaged 20k (Charlton averaged 11k in the last three seasons they played in the third tier btw) , but they also drew 25.5k for a game and 30k for another, so as I correctly stated, Leicester could draw crowds of 25k plus while playing third tier football.
And as I say, these are genuine crowds.
How do you know they were genuine crowd sizes? Bit of a leap of faith there..
Yeah good point, they may have sold season tickets at dirt cheap prices and included those in the attendance figures even if the season tickets were used or not, or given thousands of tickets away to the local community, and included those in the attendance figures, even if they was used or not. But I just canāt see Leicester being the sort of club to have the need to do that.
It would be very difficult for someone to take the reins of a "beleaguered third tier team desperately in need of reinforcements, a still relatively inexperienced manager and coaching staff, a magnificent stadium that is coming up for some TLC and a training ground that is less than half way through a vital upgrade" and turn it into a club that regularly competes in Europe. However, there are some things that need to be borne in mind.
1. Thomas Sandgaard has done the impossible, by buying a club that wasn't allowed to be sold, agreeing a deal with a landlord it's impossible to do deals with and re-uniting and re-invigorating a desperate, bewildered and fractured fanbase. So the merely "very difficult" needn't be so much as a challenge for him.
2. Manchester City have done exactly the same. Within fifteen years of playing in the third tier, they had won their third Premier League title. If you told Thomas Sandgaard that Manchester City has exceeded that target, he would want to know why anyone thinks Charlton Athletic can't achieve it.
3. Leicester City moved from tier 3 to Premier League champions in seven years. If you told Thomas Sandgaard that Leicester City had exceeded the target in half the time, he would want to know why anyone thinks Charlton Athletic can't achieve it.
Set yourself an ambitious target and you may well miss it. But, would any current Charlton fan right now complain if within fifteen years we were "only" a mid-table, well-run, profitable Premier League team?
One more thing. To win games in fifteen years' time, we will need players who are about eight, nine or ten years old right now. Who are you going to sign for at that age? A team desperate to cling on to its L1 status, or a team with an ambitious owner, heading to take the club as high as it can?
I think that, under Thomas Sandgaard, every single stakeholder in Charlton Athletic - players, staff, supporters and ambitious, young footballers - is going to have to re-set their outlook. In the simplest terms, for the first time ever, kids playing for Charlton are going to have to make sure they have one extra piece of vital equipment before they can consider themselves a footballer. A passport.
Agree with most of this, the only caveat being that the Man.City and Leicester owners are 'considerably richer than TS' (to be said in a Black Country accent).
And both Man City and Leicester were clubs who could still draw (genuine) crowds of 25k plus, and in Man Cityās case considerably more, at third tier level.
Man City average attendance in the third tier since 1966 - 0. They've not been in the third tier since at least then.
Leicester City - League 1 average attendance 2008/2009 - 20,340.
It's only been around 31,500 in the premium loog. That's over 1000 spare seats even given their success.
Man City havenāt been in the third tier since 1966?. Hmmm, Iāve watched my team play at Man City in the third tier, and that was a long time after 1966, and there was 30k there that day!
And correct, the last time Leicester played in the third tier they averaged 20k (Charlton averaged 11k in the last three seasons they played in the third tier btw) , but they also drew 25.5k for a game and 30k for another, so as I correctly stated, Leicester could draw crowds of 25k plus while playing third tier football.
And as I say, these are genuine crowds.
How do you know they were genuine crowd sizes? Bit of a leap of faith there..
It would be very difficult for someone to take the reins of a "beleaguered third tier team desperately in need of reinforcements, a still relatively inexperienced manager and coaching staff, a magnificent stadium that is coming up for some TLC and a training ground that is less than half way through a vital upgrade" and turn it into a club that regularly competes in Europe. However, there are some things that need to be borne in mind.
1. Thomas Sandgaard has done the impossible, by buying a club that wasn't allowed to be sold, agreeing a deal with a landlord it's impossible to do deals with and re-uniting and re-invigorating a desperate, bewildered and fractured fanbase. So the merely "very difficult" needn't be so much as a challenge for him.
2. Manchester City have done exactly the same. Within fifteen years of playing in the third tier, they had won their third Premier League title. If you told Thomas Sandgaard that Manchester City has exceeded that target, he would want to know why anyone thinks Charlton Athletic can't achieve it.
3. Leicester City moved from tier 3 to Premier League champions in seven years. If you told Thomas Sandgaard that Leicester City had exceeded the target in half the time, he would want to know why anyone thinks Charlton Athletic can't achieve it.
Set yourself an ambitious target and you may well miss it. But, would any current Charlton fan right now complain if within fifteen years we were "only" a mid-table, well-run, profitable Premier League team?
One more thing. To win games in fifteen years' time, we will need players who are about eight, nine or ten years old right now. Who are you going to sign for at that age? A team desperate to cling on to its L1 status, or a team with an ambitious owner, heading to take the club as high as it can?
I think that, under Thomas Sandgaard, every single stakeholder in Charlton Athletic - players, staff, supporters and ambitious, young footballers - is going to have to re-set their outlook. In the simplest terms, for the first time ever, kids playing for Charlton are going to have to make sure they have one extra piece of vital equipment before they can consider themselves a footballer. A passport.
Agree with most of this, the only caveat being that the Man.City and Leicester owners are 'considerably richer than TS' (to be said in a Black Country accent).
And both Man City and Leicester were clubs who could still draw (genuine) crowds of 25k plus, and in Man Cityās case considerably more, at third tier level.
Man City average attendance in the third tier since 1966 - 0. They've not been in the third tier since at least then.
Leicester City - League 1 average attendance 2008/2009 - 20,340.
It's only been around 31,500 in the premium loog. That's over 1000 spare seats even given their success.
Man City havenāt been in the third tier since 1966?. Hmmm, Iāve watched my team play at Man City in the third tier, and that was a long time after 1966, and there was 30k there that day!
And correct, the last time Leicester played in the third tier they averaged 20k (Charlton averaged 11k in the last three seasons they played in the third tier btw) , but they also drew 25.5k for a game and 30k for another, so as I correctly stated, Leicester could draw crowds of 25k plus while playing third tier football.
And as I say, these are genuine crowds.
How do you know they were genuine crowd sizes? Bit of a leap of faith there..
Yeah good point, they may have sold season tickets at dirt cheap prices and included those in the attendance figures even if the season tickets were used or not, or given thousands of tickets away to the local community, and included those in the attendance figures, even if they was used or not. But I just canāt see Leicester being the sort of club to have the need to do that.
How many comps to Millwall give to local community / schools ?
0 apparently, same goes for Leicester and Man City.
I admit they're bigger clubs with bigger fan bases, but that's more about lack of local opposition clubs.
If the South London clubs were one we'd have one club with 45,000 capacity in a bad season and probably over 60k as an average.
What an awful thought lol
and Man City lack local opposition clubs?? Really??
Anyway, my point wasnāt a snide dig. I just donāt think Charlton are as big a club as most of you on here think, Chizz being the prime example with that post of his. A medium sized club with a bit of potential yeah, but being talked about as if youāre in the same category as Man City, or even Leicester. Come on.
OohAah is about the only grounded one on here at the moment.
Anyway, can see Iām about as welcome as a fart on this thread so Iāll bid you farewell for now.
Congratulations on your takeover. Hopefully youāll be able to give us a game when we next meet, when ever that will be š
League clubs in:
Manchester: Man City or Man Utd... Wigan and Bolton at a stretch, then Rochdale, Oldham and Salford
London: Chelsea, Arsenal, Tottenham, Fulham, Charlton, Millwall, Palace, Brentford, Wimbledon, West Ham, QPR, Orient and Watford.
7 plays 13...
Yeah lack of local opposition clubs for fans to follow.
It would be very difficult for someone to take the reins of a "beleaguered third tier team desperately in need of reinforcements, a still relatively inexperienced manager and coaching staff, a magnificent stadium that is coming up for some TLC and a training ground that is less than half way through a vital upgrade" and turn it into a club that regularly competes in Europe. However, there are some things that need to be borne in mind.
1. Thomas Sandgaard has done the impossible, by buying a club that wasn't allowed to be sold, agreeing a deal with a landlord it's impossible to do deals with and re-uniting and re-invigorating a desperate, bewildered and fractured fanbase. So the merely "very difficult" needn't be so much as a challenge for him.
2. Manchester City have done exactly the same. Within fifteen years of playing in the third tier, they had won their third Premier League title. If you told Thomas Sandgaard that Manchester City has exceeded that target, he would want to know why anyone thinks Charlton Athletic can't achieve it.
3. Leicester City moved from tier 3 to Premier League champions in seven years. If you told Thomas Sandgaard that Leicester City had exceeded the target in half the time, he would want to know why anyone thinks Charlton Athletic can't achieve it.
Set yourself an ambitious target and you may well miss it. But, would any current Charlton fan right now complain if within fifteen years we were "only" a mid-table, well-run, profitable Premier League team?
One more thing. To win games in fifteen years' time, we will need players who are about eight, nine or ten years old right now. Who are you going to sign for at that age? A team desperate to cling on to its L1 status, or a team with an ambitious owner, heading to take the club as high as it can?
I think that, under Thomas Sandgaard, every single stakeholder in Charlton Athletic - players, staff, supporters and ambitious, young footballers - is going to have to re-set their outlook. In the simplest terms, for the first time ever, kids playing for Charlton are going to have to make sure they have one extra piece of vital equipment before they can consider themselves a footballer. A passport.
Agree with most of this, the only caveat being that the Man.City and Leicester owners are 'considerably richer than TS' (to be said in a Black Country accent).
And both Man City and Leicester were clubs who could still draw (genuine) crowds of 25k plus, and in Man Cityās case considerably more, at third tier level.
Man City average attendance in the third tier since 1966 - 0. They've not been in the third tier since at least then.
Leicester City - League 1 average attendance 2008/2009 - 20,340.
It's only been around 31,500 in the premium loog. That's over 1000 spare seats even given their success.
Man City havenāt been in the third tier since 1966?. Hmmm, Iāve watched my team play at Man City in the third tier, and that was a long time after 1966, and there was 30k there that day!
And correct, the last time Leicester played in the third tier they averaged 20k (Charlton averaged 11k in the last three seasons they played in the third tier btw) , but they also drew 25.5k for a game and 30k for another, so as I correctly stated, Leicester could draw crowds of 25k plus while playing third tier football.
And as I say, these are genuine crowds.
How do you know they were genuine crowd sizes? Bit of a leap of faith there..
It would be very difficult for someone to take the reins of a "beleaguered third tier team desperately in need of reinforcements, a still relatively inexperienced manager and coaching staff, a magnificent stadium that is coming up for some TLC and a training ground that is less than half way through a vital upgrade" and turn it into a club that regularly competes in Europe. However, there are some things that need to be borne in mind.
1. Thomas Sandgaard has done the impossible, by buying a club that wasn't allowed to be sold, agreeing a deal with a landlord it's impossible to do deals with and re-uniting and re-invigorating a desperate, bewildered and fractured fanbase. So the merely "very difficult" needn't be so much as a challenge for him.
2. Manchester City have done exactly the same. Within fifteen years of playing in the third tier, they had won their third Premier League title. If you told Thomas Sandgaard that Manchester City has exceeded that target, he would want to know why anyone thinks Charlton Athletic can't achieve it.
3. Leicester City moved from tier 3 to Premier League champions in seven years. If you told Thomas Sandgaard that Leicester City had exceeded the target in half the time, he would want to know why anyone thinks Charlton Athletic can't achieve it.
Set yourself an ambitious target and you may well miss it. But, would any current Charlton fan right now complain if within fifteen years we were "only" a mid-table, well-run, profitable Premier League team?
One more thing. To win games in fifteen years' time, we will need players who are about eight, nine or ten years old right now. Who are you going to sign for at that age? A team desperate to cling on to its L1 status, or a team with an ambitious owner, heading to take the club as high as it can?
I think that, under Thomas Sandgaard, every single stakeholder in Charlton Athletic - players, staff, supporters and ambitious, young footballers - is going to have to re-set their outlook. In the simplest terms, for the first time ever, kids playing for Charlton are going to have to make sure they have one extra piece of vital equipment before they can consider themselves a footballer. A passport.
Agree with most of this, the only caveat being that the Man.City and Leicester owners are 'considerably richer than TS' (to be said in a Black Country accent).
And both Man City and Leicester were clubs who could still draw (genuine) crowds of 25k plus, and in Man Cityās case considerably more, at third tier level.
Man City average attendance in the third tier since 1966 - 0. They've not been in the third tier since at least then.
Leicester City - League 1 average attendance 2008/2009 - 20,340.
It's only been around 31,500 in the premium loog. That's over 1000 spare seats even given their success.
Man City havenāt been in the third tier since 1966?. Hmmm, Iāve watched my team play at Man City in the third tier, and that was a long time after 1966, and there was 30k there that day!
And correct, the last time Leicester played in the third tier they averaged 20k (Charlton averaged 11k in the last three seasons they played in the third tier btw) , but they also drew 25.5k for a game and 30k for another, so as I correctly stated, Leicester could draw crowds of 25k plus while playing third tier football.
And as I say, these are genuine crowds.
How do you know they were genuine crowd sizes? Bit of a leap of faith there..
Yeah good point, they may have sold season tickets at dirt cheap prices and included those in the attendance figures even if the season tickets were used or not, or given thousands of tickets away to the local community, and included those in the attendance figures, even if they was used or not. But I just canāt see Leicester being the sort of club to have the need to do that.
How many comps to Millwall give to local community / schools ?
0 apparently, same goes for Leicester and Man City.
I admit they're bigger clubs with bigger fan bases, but that's more about lack of local opposition clubs.
If the South London clubs were one we'd have one club with 45,000 capacity in a bad season and probably over 60k as an average.
What an awful thought lol
and Man City lack local opposition clubs?? Really??
Anyway, my point wasnāt a snide dig. I just donāt think Charlton are as big a club as most of you on here think, Chizz being the prime example with that post of his. A medium sized club with a bit of potential yeah, but being talked about as if youāre in the same category as Man City, or even Leicester. Come on.
OohAah is about the only grounded one on here at the moment.
Anyway, can see Iām about as welcome as a fart on this thread so Iāll bid you farewell for now.
Congratulations on your takeover. Hopefully youāll be able to give us a game when we next meet, when ever that will be š
League clubs in:
Manchester: Man City or Man Utd... Wigan and Bolton at a stretch, then Rochdale, Oldham and Salford
London: Chelsea, Arsenal, Tottenham, Fulham, Charlton, Millwall, Palace, Brentford, Wimbledon, West Ham, QPR, Orient and Watford.
7 plays 13...
Yeah lack of local opposition clubs for fans to follow.
P.S. Watford isnāt in London. Come on mate, Iām supposed to be the thick one here š
Wait so you're using the greater London population Vs the city of Manchester population? What's that on being thick? We could use the City of London 8-10,000 People?
It's counted as a London club. Just like the clubs in greater Manchester (2.8m population) are included in the Manchester list.
The big London clubs almost entirely play at a higher level than the Manchester Clubs or the Smaller London clubs, there's only 2 BIG clubs in Manchester...
Thus they (the big clubs in London and Manchester) have more pull than the smaller clubs.
It would be very difficult for someone to take the reins of a "beleaguered third tier team desperately in need of reinforcements, a still relatively inexperienced manager and coaching staff, a magnificent stadium that is coming up for some TLC and a training ground that is less than half way through a vital upgrade" and turn it into a club that regularly competes in Europe. However, there are some things that need to be borne in mind.
1. Thomas Sandgaard has done the impossible, by buying a club that wasn't allowed to be sold, agreeing a deal with a landlord it's impossible to do deals with and re-uniting and re-invigorating a desperate, bewildered and fractured fanbase. So the merely "very difficult" needn't be so much as a challenge for him.
2. Manchester City have done exactly the same. Within fifteen years of playing in the third tier, they had won their third Premier League title. If you told Thomas Sandgaard that Manchester City has exceeded that target, he would want to know why anyone thinks Charlton Athletic can't achieve it.
3. Leicester City moved from tier 3 to Premier League champions in seven years. If you told Thomas Sandgaard that Leicester City had exceeded the target in half the time, he would want to know why anyone thinks Charlton Athletic can't achieve it.
Set yourself an ambitious target and you may well miss it. But, would any current Charlton fan right now complain if within fifteen years we were "only" a mid-table, well-run, profitable Premier League team?
One more thing. To win games in fifteen years' time, we will need players who are about eight, nine or ten years old right now. Who are you going to sign for at that age? A team desperate to cling on to its L1 status, or a team with an ambitious owner, heading to take the club as high as it can?
I think that, under Thomas Sandgaard, every single stakeholder in Charlton Athletic - players, staff, supporters and ambitious, young footballers - is going to have to re-set their outlook. In the simplest terms, for the first time ever, kids playing for Charlton are going to have to make sure they have one extra piece of vital equipment before they can consider themselves a footballer. A passport.
Agree with most of this, the only caveat being that the Man.City and Leicester owners are 'considerably richer than TS' (to be said in a Black Country accent).
And both Man City and Leicester were clubs who could still draw (genuine) crowds of 25k plus, and in Man Cityās case considerably more, at third tier level.
Man City average attendance in the third tier since 1966 - 0. They've not been in the third tier since at least then.
Leicester City - League 1 average attendance 2008/2009 - 20,340.
It's only been around 31,500 in the premium loog. That's over 1000 spare seats even given their success.
Man City havenāt been in the third tier since 1966?. Hmmm, Iāve watched my team play at Man City in the third tier, and that was a long time after 1966, and there was 30k there that day!
And correct, the last time Leicester played in the third tier they averaged 20k (Charlton averaged 11k in the last three seasons they played in the third tier btw) , but they also drew 25.5k for a game and 30k for another, so as I correctly stated, Leicester could draw crowds of 25k plus while playing third tier football.
And as I say, these are genuine crowds.
How do you know they were genuine crowd sizes? Bit of a leap of faith there..
It would be very difficult for someone to take the reins of a "beleaguered third tier team desperately in need of reinforcements, a still relatively inexperienced manager and coaching staff, a magnificent stadium that is coming up for some TLC and a training ground that is less than half way through a vital upgrade" and turn it into a club that regularly competes in Europe. However, there are some things that need to be borne in mind.
1. Thomas Sandgaard has done the impossible, by buying a club that wasn't allowed to be sold, agreeing a deal with a landlord it's impossible to do deals with and re-uniting and re-invigorating a desperate, bewildered and fractured fanbase. So the merely "very difficult" needn't be so much as a challenge for him.
2. Manchester City have done exactly the same. Within fifteen years of playing in the third tier, they had won their third Premier League title. If you told Thomas Sandgaard that Manchester City has exceeded that target, he would want to know why anyone thinks Charlton Athletic can't achieve it.
3. Leicester City moved from tier 3 to Premier League champions in seven years. If you told Thomas Sandgaard that Leicester City had exceeded the target in half the time, he would want to know why anyone thinks Charlton Athletic can't achieve it.
Set yourself an ambitious target and you may well miss it. But, would any current Charlton fan right now complain if within fifteen years we were "only" a mid-table, well-run, profitable Premier League team?
One more thing. To win games in fifteen years' time, we will need players who are about eight, nine or ten years old right now. Who are you going to sign for at that age? A team desperate to cling on to its L1 status, or a team with an ambitious owner, heading to take the club as high as it can?
I think that, under Thomas Sandgaard, every single stakeholder in Charlton Athletic - players, staff, supporters and ambitious, young footballers - is going to have to re-set their outlook. In the simplest terms, for the first time ever, kids playing for Charlton are going to have to make sure they have one extra piece of vital equipment before they can consider themselves a footballer. A passport.
Agree with most of this, the only caveat being that the Man.City and Leicester owners are 'considerably richer than TS' (to be said in a Black Country accent).
And both Man City and Leicester were clubs who could still draw (genuine) crowds of 25k plus, and in Man Cityās case considerably more, at third tier level.
Man City average attendance in the third tier since 1966 - 0. They've not been in the third tier since at least then.
Leicester City - League 1 average attendance 2008/2009 - 20,340.
It's only been around 31,500 in the premium loog. That's over 1000 spare seats even given their success.
Man City havenāt been in the third tier since 1966?. Hmmm, Iāve watched my team play at Man City in the third tier, and that was a long time after 1966, and there was 30k there that day!
And correct, the last time Leicester played in the third tier they averaged 20k (Charlton averaged 11k in the last three seasons they played in the third tier btw) , but they also drew 25.5k for a game and 30k for another, so as I correctly stated, Leicester could draw crowds of 25k plus while playing third tier football.
And as I say, these are genuine crowds.
How do you know they were genuine crowd sizes? Bit of a leap of faith there..
Yeah good point, they may have sold season tickets at dirt cheap prices and included those in the attendance figures even if the season tickets were used or not, or given thousands of tickets away to the local community, and included those in the attendance figures, even if they was used or not. But I just canāt see Leicester being the sort of club to have the need to do that.
How many comps to Millwall give to local community / schools ?
0 apparently, same goes for Leicester and Man City.
I admit they're bigger clubs with bigger fan bases, but that's more about lack of local opposition clubs.
If the South London clubs were one we'd have one club with 45,000 capacity in a bad season and probably over 60k as an average.
What an awful thought lol
and Man City lack local opposition clubs?? Really??
Anyway, my point wasnāt a snide dig. I just donāt think Charlton are as big a club as most of you on here think, Chizz being the prime example with that post of his. A medium sized club with a bit of potential yeah, but being talked about as if youāre in the same category as Man City, or even Leicester. Come on.
OohAah is about the only grounded one on here at the moment.
Anyway, can see Iām about as welcome as a fart on this thread so Iāll bid you farewell for now.
Congratulations on your takeover. Hopefully youāll be able to give us a game when we next meet, when ever that will be š
League clubs in:
Manchester: Man City or Man Utd... Wigan and Bolton at a stretch, then Rochdale, Oldham and Salford
London: Chelsea, Arsenal, Tottenham, Fulham, Charlton, Millwall, Palace, Brentford, Wimbledon, West Ham, QPR, Orient and Watford.
7 plays 13...
Yeah lack of local opposition clubs for fans to follow.
Population of Manchester= 500k
Population of London= 9 mill
I rest my case.
Take out the population of London not interested in football and add all those who now live in London but originate elsewhere and support other teams from āhomeā and all the glory hunters who were born in London and support Liverpool or Man U and it suddenly becomes a different figure.
P.S. Watford isnāt in London. Come on mate, Iām supposed to be the thick one here š
It's counted as a London club. Just like the clubs in greater Manchester (2.8m population) are included in the Manchester list.
The big London clubs almost entirely play at a higher level than the Manchester Clubs, there's only 2 big clubs there. Thus drawing more fans to the big clubs.
Watford is outside of London. On no basis is it counted as a London club.
But even taking in to consideration the population of GREATER Manchester being 2.8 million, then itās still all relative to the London figures. A third of the population, 7 league clubs v 13. two big clubs in Manchester v 4 in London (and yes, it pains me to include West Ham as a big club).
Anyway, weāre splitting hairs here. My initial point remains. Charlton can not be compared to Man City when it comes to potential. On any level. Even before the Arabs turned up at City.
It would be very difficult for someone to take the reins of a "beleaguered third tier team desperately in need of reinforcements, a still relatively inexperienced manager and coaching staff, a magnificent stadium that is coming up for some TLC and a training ground that is less than half way through a vital upgrade" and turn it into a club that regularly competes in Europe. However, there are some things that need to be borne in mind.
1. Thomas Sandgaard has done the impossible, by buying a club that wasn't allowed to be sold, agreeing a deal with a landlord it's impossible to do deals with and re-uniting and re-invigorating a desperate, bewildered and fractured fanbase. So the merely "very difficult" needn't be so much as a challenge for him.
2. Manchester City have done exactly the same. Within fifteen years of playing in the third tier, they had won their third Premier League title. If you told Thomas Sandgaard that Manchester City has exceeded that target, he would want to know why anyone thinks Charlton Athletic can't achieve it.
3. Leicester City moved from tier 3 to Premier League champions in seven years. If you told Thomas Sandgaard that Leicester City had exceeded the target in half the time, he would want to know why anyone thinks Charlton Athletic can't achieve it.
Set yourself an ambitious target and you may well miss it. But, would any current Charlton fan right now complain if within fifteen years we were "only" a mid-table, well-run, profitable Premier League team?
One more thing. To win games in fifteen years' time, we will need players who are about eight, nine or ten years old right now. Who are you going to sign for at that age? A team desperate to cling on to its L1 status, or a team with an ambitious owner, heading to take the club as high as it can?
I think that, under Thomas Sandgaard, every single stakeholder in Charlton Athletic - players, staff, supporters and ambitious, young footballers - is going to have to re-set their outlook. In the simplest terms, for the first time ever, kids playing for Charlton are going to have to make sure they have one extra piece of vital equipment before they can consider themselves a footballer. A passport.
Agree with most of this, the only caveat being that the Man.City and Leicester owners are 'considerably richer than TS' (to be said in a Black Country accent).
And both Man City and Leicester were clubs who could still draw (genuine) crowds of 25k plus, and in Man Cityās case considerably more, at third tier level.
Man City average attendance in the third tier since 1966 - 0. They've not been in the third tier since at least then.
Leicester City - League 1 average attendance 2008/2009 - 20,340.
It's only been around 31,500 in the premium loog. That's over 1000 spare seats even given their success.
Man City havenāt been in the third tier since 1966?. Hmmm, Iāve watched my team play at Man City in the third tier, and that was a long time after 1966, and there was 30k there that day!
And correct, the last time Leicester played in the third tier they averaged 20k (Charlton averaged 11k in the last three seasons they played in the third tier btw) , but they also drew 25.5k for a game and 30k for another, so as I correctly stated, Leicester could draw crowds of 25k plus while playing third tier football.
And as I say, these are genuine crowds.
How do you know they were genuine crowd sizes? Bit of a leap of faith there..
It would be very difficult for someone to take the reins of a "beleaguered third tier team desperately in need of reinforcements, a still relatively inexperienced manager and coaching staff, a magnificent stadium that is coming up for some TLC and a training ground that is less than half way through a vital upgrade" and turn it into a club that regularly competes in Europe. However, there are some things that need to be borne in mind.
1. Thomas Sandgaard has done the impossible, by buying a club that wasn't allowed to be sold, agreeing a deal with a landlord it's impossible to do deals with and re-uniting and re-invigorating a desperate, bewildered and fractured fanbase. So the merely "very difficult" needn't be so much as a challenge for him.
2. Manchester City have done exactly the same. Within fifteen years of playing in the third tier, they had won their third Premier League title. If you told Thomas Sandgaard that Manchester City has exceeded that target, he would want to know why anyone thinks Charlton Athletic can't achieve it.
3. Leicester City moved from tier 3 to Premier League champions in seven years. If you told Thomas Sandgaard that Leicester City had exceeded the target in half the time, he would want to know why anyone thinks Charlton Athletic can't achieve it.
Set yourself an ambitious target and you may well miss it. But, would any current Charlton fan right now complain if within fifteen years we were "only" a mid-table, well-run, profitable Premier League team?
One more thing. To win games in fifteen years' time, we will need players who are about eight, nine or ten years old right now. Who are you going to sign for at that age? A team desperate to cling on to its L1 status, or a team with an ambitious owner, heading to take the club as high as it can?
I think that, under Thomas Sandgaard, every single stakeholder in Charlton Athletic - players, staff, supporters and ambitious, young footballers - is going to have to re-set their outlook. In the simplest terms, for the first time ever, kids playing for Charlton are going to have to make sure they have one extra piece of vital equipment before they can consider themselves a footballer. A passport.
Agree with most of this, the only caveat being that the Man.City and Leicester owners are 'considerably richer than TS' (to be said in a Black Country accent).
And both Man City and Leicester were clubs who could still draw (genuine) crowds of 25k plus, and in Man Cityās case considerably more, at third tier level.
Man City average attendance in the third tier since 1966 - 0. They've not been in the third tier since at least then.
Leicester City - League 1 average attendance 2008/2009 - 20,340.
It's only been around 31,500 in the premium loog. That's over 1000 spare seats even given their success.
Man City havenāt been in the third tier since 1966?. Hmmm, Iāve watched my team play at Man City in the third tier, and that was a long time after 1966, and there was 30k there that day!
And correct, the last time Leicester played in the third tier they averaged 20k (Charlton averaged 11k in the last three seasons they played in the third tier btw) , but they also drew 25.5k for a game and 30k for another, so as I correctly stated, Leicester could draw crowds of 25k plus while playing third tier football.
And as I say, these are genuine crowds.
How do you know they were genuine crowd sizes? Bit of a leap of faith there..
Yeah good point, they may have sold season tickets at dirt cheap prices and included those in the attendance figures even if the season tickets were used or not, or given thousands of tickets away to the local community, and included those in the attendance figures, even if they was used or not. But I just canāt see Leicester being the sort of club to have the need to do that.
How many comps to Millwall give to local community / schools ?
0 apparently, same goes for Leicester and Man City.
I admit they're bigger clubs with bigger fan bases, but that's more about lack of local opposition clubs.
If the South London clubs were one we'd have one club with 45,000 capacity in a bad season and probably over 60k as an average.
What an awful thought lol
and Man City lack local opposition clubs?? Really??
Anyway, my point wasnāt a snide dig. I just donāt think Charlton are as big a club as most of you on here think, Chizz being the prime example with that post of his. A medium sized club with a bit of potential yeah, but being talked about as if youāre in the same category as Man City, or even Leicester. Come on.
OohAah is about the only grounded one on here at the moment.
Anyway, can see Iām about as welcome as a fart on this thread so Iāll bid you farewell for now.
Congratulations on your takeover. Hopefully youāll be able to give us a game when we next meet, when ever that will be š
League clubs in:
Manchester: Man City or Man Utd... Wigan and Bolton at a stretch, then Rochdale, Oldham and Salford
London: Chelsea, Arsenal, Tottenham, Fulham, Charlton, Millwall, Palace, Brentford, Wimbledon, West Ham, QPR, Orient and Watford.
7 plays 13...
Yeah lack of local opposition clubs for fans to follow.
Population of Manchester= 500k
Population of London= 9 mill
I rest my case.
Take out the population of London not interested in football and add all those who now live in London but originate elsewhere and support other teams from āhomeā and all the glory hunters who were born in London and support Liverpool or Man U and it suddenly becomes a different figure.
Donāt mate, please, my heads spinning as it is š
Anyway, weāre splitting hairs here. My initial point remains. Charlton can not be compared to Man City when it comes to potential. On any level. Even before the Arabs turned up at City.
I remember that one. My only visit to Maine Road. City were wanting to clinch promotion, we were just lambs for the slaughter, We never stood a chance.
Is anybody really contesting that we have a comparable support base to a pre-Arab City? No chance. As Oohaah will confirm, the proof of the pudding is in the away numbers.
It would be very difficult for someone to take the reins of a "beleaguered third tier team desperately in need of reinforcements, a still relatively inexperienced manager and coaching staff, a magnificent stadium that is coming up for some TLC and a training ground that is less than half way through a vital upgrade" and turn it into a club that regularly competes in Europe. However, there are some things that need to be borne in mind.
1. Thomas Sandgaard has done the impossible, by buying a club that wasn't allowed to be sold, agreeing a deal with a landlord it's impossible to do deals with and re-uniting and re-invigorating a desperate, bewildered and fractured fanbase. So the merely "very difficult" needn't be so much as a challenge for him.
2. Manchester City have done exactly the same. Within fifteen years of playing in the third tier, they had won their third Premier League title. If you told Thomas Sandgaard that Manchester City has exceeded that target, he would want to know why anyone thinks Charlton Athletic can't achieve it.
3. Leicester City moved from tier 3 to Premier League champions in seven years. If you told Thomas Sandgaard that Leicester City had exceeded the target in half the time, he would want to know why anyone thinks Charlton Athletic can't achieve it.
Set yourself an ambitious target and you may well miss it. But, would any current Charlton fan right now complain if within fifteen years we were "only" a mid-table, well-run, profitable Premier League team?
One more thing. To win games in fifteen years' time, we will need players who are about eight, nine or ten years old right now. Who are you going to sign for at that age? A team desperate to cling on to its L1 status, or a team with an ambitious owner, heading to take the club as high as it can?
I think that, under Thomas Sandgaard, every single stakeholder in Charlton Athletic - players, staff, supporters and ambitious, young footballers - is going to have to re-set their outlook. In the simplest terms, for the first time ever, kids playing for Charlton are going to have to make sure they have one extra piece of vital equipment before they can consider themselves a footballer. A passport.
Agree with most of this, the only caveat being that the Man.City and Leicester owners are 'considerably richer than TS' (to be said in a Black Country accent).
And both Man City and Leicester were clubs who could still draw (genuine) crowds of 25k plus, and in Man Cityās case considerably more, at third tier level.
Man City average attendance in the third tier since 1966 - 0. They've not been in the third tier since at least then.
Leicester City - League 1 average attendance 2008/2009 - 20,340.
It's only been around 31,500 in the premium loog. That's over 1000 spare seats even given their success.
Man City havenāt been in the third tier since 1966?. Hmmm, Iāve watched my team play at Man City in the third tier, and that was a long time after 1966, and there was 30k there that day!
And correct, the last time Leicester played in the third tier they averaged 20k (Charlton averaged 11k in the last three seasons they played in the third tier btw) , but they also drew 25.5k for a game and 30k for another, so as I correctly stated, Leicester could draw crowds of 25k plus while playing third tier football.
And as I say, these are genuine crowds.
How do you know they were genuine crowd sizes? Bit of a leap of faith there..
It would be very difficult for someone to take the reins of a "beleaguered third tier team desperately in need of reinforcements, a still relatively inexperienced manager and coaching staff, a magnificent stadium that is coming up for some TLC and a training ground that is less than half way through a vital upgrade" and turn it into a club that regularly competes in Europe. However, there are some things that need to be borne in mind.
1. Thomas Sandgaard has done the impossible, by buying a club that wasn't allowed to be sold, agreeing a deal with a landlord it's impossible to do deals with and re-uniting and re-invigorating a desperate, bewildered and fractured fanbase. So the merely "very difficult" needn't be so much as a challenge for him.
2. Manchester City have done exactly the same. Within fifteen years of playing in the third tier, they had won their third Premier League title. If you told Thomas Sandgaard that Manchester City has exceeded that target, he would want to know why anyone thinks Charlton Athletic can't achieve it.
3. Leicester City moved from tier 3 to Premier League champions in seven years. If you told Thomas Sandgaard that Leicester City had exceeded the target in half the time, he would want to know why anyone thinks Charlton Athletic can't achieve it.
Set yourself an ambitious target and you may well miss it. But, would any current Charlton fan right now complain if within fifteen years we were "only" a mid-table, well-run, profitable Premier League team?
One more thing. To win games in fifteen years' time, we will need players who are about eight, nine or ten years old right now. Who are you going to sign for at that age? A team desperate to cling on to its L1 status, or a team with an ambitious owner, heading to take the club as high as it can?
I think that, under Thomas Sandgaard, every single stakeholder in Charlton Athletic - players, staff, supporters and ambitious, young footballers - is going to have to re-set their outlook. In the simplest terms, for the first time ever, kids playing for Charlton are going to have to make sure they have one extra piece of vital equipment before they can consider themselves a footballer. A passport.
Agree with most of this, the only caveat being that the Man.City and Leicester owners are 'considerably richer than TS' (to be said in a Black Country accent).
And both Man City and Leicester were clubs who could still draw (genuine) crowds of 25k plus, and in Man Cityās case considerably more, at third tier level.
Man City average attendance in the third tier since 1966 - 0. They've not been in the third tier since at least then.
Leicester City - League 1 average attendance 2008/2009 - 20,340.
It's only been around 31,500 in the premium loog. That's over 1000 spare seats even given their success.
Man City havenāt been in the third tier since 1966?. Hmmm, Iāve watched my team play at Man City in the third tier, and that was a long time after 1966, and there was 30k there that day!
And correct, the last time Leicester played in the third tier they averaged 20k (Charlton averaged 11k in the last three seasons they played in the third tier btw) , but they also drew 25.5k for a game and 30k for another, so as I correctly stated, Leicester could draw crowds of 25k plus while playing third tier football.
And as I say, these are genuine crowds.
How do you know they were genuine crowd sizes? Bit of a leap of faith there..
Yeah good point, they may have sold season tickets at dirt cheap prices and included those in the attendance figures even if the season tickets were used or not, or given thousands of tickets away to the local community, and included those in the attendance figures, even if they was used or not. But I just canāt see Leicester being the sort of club to have the need to do that.
How many comps to Millwall give to local community / schools ?
0 apparently, same goes for Leicester and Man City.
I admit they're bigger clubs with bigger fan bases, but that's more about lack of local opposition clubs.
If the South London clubs were one we'd have one club with 45,000 capacity in a bad season and probably over 60k as an average.
What an awful thought lol
and Man City lack local opposition clubs?? Really??
Anyway, my point wasnāt a snide dig. I just donāt think Charlton are as big a club as most of you on here think, Chizz being the prime example with that post of his. A medium sized club with a bit of potential yeah, but being talked about as if youāre in the same category as Man City, or even Leicester. Come on.
OohAah is about the only grounded one on here at the moment.
Anyway, can see Iām about as welcome as a fart on this thread so Iāll bid you farewell for now.
Congratulations on your takeover. Hopefully youāll be able to give us a game when we next meet, when ever that will be š
You must spend an awful lot of time on here to make the claim that you know what I think. If you had spent some of that time reading my post, to which you have taken exception, you would see that it's an explanation of why Charlton's new owner's ambitions are not impossible. I have not said they're likely.
Thank you for the congratulations, however. That's very magnanimous and gracious of you. It must be very painful to have to go onto a forum from a neighbouring club that's bigger than the one you support and have to acknowledge the upward path it's on. Fortunately, Charlton fans won't ever have to experience that.
I'm not quite sure what attendances have to do with any off this tbh. We all know that Charlton have a big floating support. When we were doing well under powell in league one we regularly got bigger crowds than palace who were struggling in the champ. If we do well under Sandgaard we could easily match and exceed those crowds again. Millwall have had a successful couple of years by their standards and they have a small fanbase, so crowds dont equal success. What they do have though is a very sensible and rich owner who runs the club very well. What is important to us is that we now also appear to have a very clever, wealthy and enthusiastic owner who will spend money in the right way. I'd be more than happy knocking around the championship with the occasional crack at the top flight, but why not shoot for the stars eh?
Edit. I would also add that Sandgaards approach is a lot more appealing to us fans, rather than Meires comments about Roland not seeing winning games as important! Even if he falls on his arse, it's got to better than that!
Comments
And yet you returned.
Joking aside, thank you for congratulations, seriously.
Its nice to know that there is a least one spanner who is "friendly".
Stay safe.
Manchester:
Man City or Man Utd... Wigan and Bolton at a stretch, then Rochdale, Oldham and Salford
London:
Chelsea, Arsenal, Tottenham, Fulham, Charlton, Millwall, Palace, Brentford, Wimbledon, West Ham, QPR, Orient and Watford.
7 plays 13...
Yeah lack of local opposition clubs for fans to follow.
Population of London= 9 mill
I rest my case.
It's counted as a London club. Just like the clubs in greater Manchester (2.8m population) are included in the Manchester list.
The big London clubs almost entirely play at a higher level than the Manchester Clubs or the Smaller London clubs, there's only 2 BIG clubs in Manchester...
Thus they (the big clubs in London and Manchester) have more pull than the smaller clubs.
@MillwallFan left here at 9-28pm.
šš
we were getting 5k back then
https://www.citytilidie.com/latest/charlton-home-198485/
We never stood a chance.
As Oohaah will confirm, the proof of the pudding is in the away numbers.
Thank you for the congratulations, however. That's very magnanimous and gracious of you. It must be very painful to have to go onto a forum from a neighbouring club that's bigger than the one you support and have to acknowledge the upward path it's on. Fortunately, Charlton fans won't ever have to experience that.
Edit. I would also add that Sandgaards approach is a lot more appealing to us fans, rather than Meires comments about Roland not seeing winning games as important! Even if he falls on his arse, it's got to better than that!