Would the real Leicester City, please step forward

[camberwell fox]

Good evening everyone,

Been supporting the City (home and away for the vast majority of the 80's and 90's and from afar for the last 7 years)..

I've seen some great high's and some equally terrible low's (not the player, that is), so here's the question...

What should LCFC's rightful league position be?

By this i mean take a look at the club history, the size of the city, the size of the support, the size of the stadium, the results in all competitions...what is our rightful position (if you add the premier and fizzy league together from 1st to 46th??).

Are we currently where WE would expect us to be (history based), or are we treading water? Or were we treading water under the MON era and under any other (relative) successful eras?

What do you think? (If you give a f**k that is)..

 

[FantasyFox]

Camberwell...I've been waiting a long time for someone to ask me that question.

I started to type but it's such a long reply....I couldn't be arsed.

At best we could finish regularly in the top ten and we will be overachieving. At worst we could slip into the league below us and remain a decent sized club in that league for eternity. I suspect that anywhere in between is about right and that better or worse than that would mean massive over or underachievement.

I think (given time) our position is dictated by the abilities of the manager. I just hope that this time we have a decent manager that can take us toward the top end of performance expectations because so many of the managers since O'Neill have either been poor or have not been given the time to prove their worth or given the resources that a club our size should be able to provide.

 

[ChrisFilter]

Over the last 20 years including league position, size of ground, size of support and facilities... probably 17th. We're punching under our weight significantly.

 

[camberwell fox]

Over the last 20 years including league position, size of ground, size of support and facilities... probably 17th. We're punching under our weight significantly.

The ground capacity is 32,000 (i think), our average support is 23 000 (a guess) we're ( i think the 9th biggest city (population wise), why aren't we the (at least) the 9th best (overall) club?

 

[alex]

The ground capacity is 32,000 (i think), our average support is 23 000 (a guess) we're ( i think the 9th biggest city (population wise), why aren't we the (at least) the 9th best (overall) club?

Years of mis-management. MON had us there quite comfortably.

 

[camberwell fox]

Camberwell...I've been waiting a long time for someone to ask me that question.

I started to type but it's such a long reply....I couldn't be arsed.

At best we could finish regularly in the top ten and we will be overachieving. At worst we could slip into the league below us and remain a decent sized club in that league for eternity. I suspect that anywhere in between is about right and that better or worse than that would mean massive over or underachievement.

I think (given time) our position is dictated by the abilities of the manager. I just hope that this time we have a decent manager that can take us toward the top end of performance expectations because so many of the managers since O'Neill have either been poor or have not been given the time to prove their worth or given the resources that a club our size should be able to provide.

So, given our (debatable and as yet unproven) best manager for a while, if we are eventually promoted why is the top 10 punching above our weight bearing in mind all teh factors?

 

[camberwell fox]

Years of mis-management. MON had us there quite comfortably.

So, are we a sleeping giant or a 'Wolves' (continual underachiever?)..Wolves are not a sleeping giant as (in the last 20 years...mods please correct) they have done nothing...

 

[alex]

So, are we a sleeping giant or a 'Wolves' (continual underachiever?)..Wolves are not a sleeping giant as (in the last 20 years...mods please correct) they have done nothing...

Personally, I believe we are a club who over-achieved under MON, but has all the capabilities and facilities to do that again, and if we're then a) lucky and b) well handled then perhaps we can be a consistent Premiership side.

 

[Redditch Fox]

Personally, I believe we are a club who over-achieved under MON, but has all the capabilities and facilities to do that again, and if we're then a) lucky and b) well handled then perhaps we can be a consistent Premiership side.

I think you are against the recurring manager comparison syndrome - but you are dangerously near it in the above.

As I see it - we have been well below the par for a long time now. And to be honest nothing that has happened in the last few weeks as changed that view. People get incredibly over-excited by a home win against a very unstable neighbouring team and I find that to be a lot of froth.

I think almost any second tier club is now very likely to struggle badly if promoted because of the widened gap since the MON era. Consequently, I am somewhat pessimistic about our chances of re-establishing ourselves within the Premiership. That said, we have to have a go at achieving that consistent Premiership spot. To do that we have to be very well managed and that almost certainly means giving a manager the opportunity to build long term success. I don't think there is any evidence either way to indicate that we are or aren't on the right track at the moment.

 

[camberwell fox]

Personally, I believe we are a club who over-achieved under MON, but has all the capabilities and facilities to do that again, and if we're then a) lucky and b) well handled then perhaps we can be a consistent Premiership side.

We won the league cup twice (almost certainly over achieving) and (to the best of my memory - finished 11, 10 and 9th (not in order).

Therefore the MON era was to form????????

 

[camberwell fox]

I think you are against the recurring manager comparison syndrome - but you are dangerously near it in the above.

As I see it - we have been well below the par for a long time now. And to be honest nothing that has happened in the last few weeks as changed that view. People get incredibly over-excited by a home win against a very unstable neighbouring team and I find that to be a lot of froth.

I think almost any second tier club is now very likely to struggle badly if promoted because of the widened gap since the MON era. Consequently, I am somewhat pessimistic about our chances of re-establishing ourselves within the Premiership. That said, we have to have a go at achieving that consistent Premiership spot. To do that we have to be very well managed and that almost certainly means giving a manager the opportunity to build long term success. I don't think there is any evidence either way to indicate that we are or aren't on the right track at the moment.

 

[camberwell fox]

Sorry forgot to add the text ....great post....

 

[Brauny Blue]

Times are changing rapidly. Before the premier lge was introduced i would have said that for many years Leicester were between a mid table Division 1 side(old format) at best, and a good division 2 side at worst.
In the days before the premier lge and the silly money, there were many teams in the top flight believing that they could win the title. The likes of Ipswich, Norwich, West Ham, and Watford all came close in the 80's. Man U, Chelsea and Arsenal did not feature in the title races that much. Money then did not play such a big part as it does today.
Since the premier lge was introduced i would now change how standing to a struggling top flight team at best, to a struggling championship team at worst. Thanks to the blundering mis-management of the club during a crucial phase in footballing history we have been left miles behind some very ordinary clubs. We fecked up and dipped out at the wrong time and unless we get lucky it could take years to get a foothold again. People may laugh at whats happened to Derby this season, but imo even with relegation a certainty they are now a step further on than us. If Derby have budgeted correctly then they will have benefited greatly even from their 1 year stay in the prem. They will be amongst the strong favourites for automatic promotion, and imo whats happening to their club is a route that we may have to follow. I dont believe Milans money is enough to get us promoted with a side to stay up first time round. Hope i'm wrong of course.

 

[Macky]

We're shit, we've always been shit and we'll always be in the shit with occasional out of form inspirational wins.

 

[Bobby Smith]

The ground capacity is 32,000 (i think), our average support is 23 000 (a guess) we're ( i think the 9th biggest city (population wise), why aren't we the (at least) the 9th best (overall) club?

Overtaken by Cov for population I think, 10th most populated city in England we are. Let's not forget we have a rugby team who take some of our support. Also if the overall crowd represented the ethnic make up of our city our attendances would grow massively.

 

[OldGit]

Times are changing rapidly. Before the premier lge was introduced i would have said that for many years Leicester were between a mid table Division 1 side(old format) at best, and a good division 2 side at worst.
In the days before the premier lge and the silly money, there were many teams in the top flight believing that they could win the title. The likes of Ipswich, Norwich, West Ham, and Watford all came close in the 80's. Man U, Chelsea and Arsenal did not feature in the title races that much. Money then did not play such a big part as it does today.
Since the premier lge was introduced i would now change how standing to a struggling top flight team at best, to a struggling championship team at worst. Thanks to the blundering mis-management of the club during a crucial phase in footballing history we have been left miles behind some very ordinary clubs. We fecked up and dipped out at the wrong time and unless we get lucky it could take years to get a foothold again. People may laugh at whats happened to Derby this season, but imo even with relegation a certainty they are now a step further on than us. If Derby have budgeted correctly then they will have benefited greatly even from their 1 year stay in the prem. They will be amongst the strong favourites for automatic promotion, and imo whats happening to their club is a route that we may have to follow. I dont believe Milans money is enough to get us promoted with a side to stay up first time round. Hope i'm wrong of course.

I agree with that.

If you lok at the last 60 years (ie since the 92-club league structure) we have averaged about 20th, among a cluster of about ten teams like Derby, Forest, Sunderland, the 2 Sheffields, West Ham etc. We have, with Suderland and Wednesday, been the ultimate Yo-Yo. We have tended to do slightly better than that group in the 2 cup competitions. So you could say that is our "natural" position.

However, as Braunie points out, since the introduction of the Prem and Champions league, things have changed and for clubs like us the occasional bout of over-achievement becomes steadily less likely, and a "new order" is evolving with a group of clubs who will be the new permanent "bottom of Prem/top of Championship". Every year that passes without joining that group makes it less likely that we will.

 

[alex]

We won the league cup twice (almost certainly over achieving) and (to the best of my memory - finished 11, 10 and 9th (not in order).

Therefore the MON era was to form????????

It was indeed, but you're basing our rightful position on everything but a rich successful footballing past, aside from a few amazing years.

 

[Hammond Organ]

The ground capacity is 32,000 (i think), our average support is 23 000 (a guess) we're ( i think the 9th biggest city (population wise), why aren't we the (at least) the 9th best (overall) club?

Overtaken by Cov for population I think, 10th most populated city in England we are. Let's not forget we have a rugby team who take some of our support. Also if the overall crowd represented the ethnic make up of our city our attendances would grow massively.

London has over 7m people in it. In regards to the above, even with the amount of teams around the London area, they would have all the best sides in the country. Size of population has nothing to do with it. History, current financial backing, manager ability, opportunity to attract decent players and definitely a huge slice of luck are what counts.

 

[OldGit]

Size of population is a factor - though not the actual population of the town or city, which is quite arbtrary. But being in an area which has a large number of people with easy access and little competition does mean that there will always be a significant number of people who identify with the club and ensure that even in the bad times there will be a reasonable level of support. That is a requirement to sustain a position in the higher reaches of the league structure.

 

[newtonfox]

I agree with that.

If you lok at the last 60 years (ie since the 92-club league structure) we have averaged about 20th, among a cluster of about ten teams like Derby, Forest, Sunderland, the 2 Sheffields, West Ham etc. We have, with Suderland and Wednesday, been the ultimate Yo-Yo. We have tended to do slightly better than that group in the 2 cup competitions. So you could say that is our "natural" position.

However, as Braunie points out, since the introduction of the Prem and Champions league, things have changed and for clubs like us the occasional bout of over-achievement becomes steadily less likely, and a "new order" is evolving with a group of clubs who will be the new permanent "bottom of Prem/top of Championship". Every year that passes without joining that group makes it less likely that we will.

well said