Makes interesting reading. Wonder how some of those ‘big clubs’ survive
Considering there are 68 teams ‘higher’ than us think it shows where we should be when the big non league shake up happens
Noticed this yesterday. Considering the top six or seven are essentially Football League clubs, it makes for good reading.
We’re 60th now, two years ago we would have been around 140th on that list. It demonstrates the progress that has been made.
We already knew that Witton Albion has the fanbase to play at a higher level than we are currently at, if we were in the Conference North right now, we would be 10th.
On a strange note, this one has us in 57th… http://www.thelinnets.co.uk/turnstile.php?s=2011
The second one only has steps 1-4. Some big attendances in the northern league (Darlington come in 18th overall)
Being a bit pedantic but the average is a little higher than we would expect most Saturday home games, thanks to having already played FCUM and Chorley at home I guess. But agree with the above, for the crowds we’re getting we could compete at a higher level.
Just listening to the podcast as I type and they’re talking about promotion chances; If we’re realistic it will be difficult and lets hope that if it doesnt happen this season, we can keep the team together, keep the attendnaces up and have a real go next season. It would be sad to see us fail and then let it all fall apart.
Ahhhh, I see.
Attendance was 464, we’ve had higher against Blyth, Whitby, Nantwich and Ilkeston! 
So have you factored in one-off “bumper” crowds other teams on the list may have had?
If you look at the list there are a lot of northern league teams on there only because they have had Darlington visit.
No way would bishop Auckland and guisborough ever feature in there had we not taken well over 1000!!!
The same I guess is for those that have had the visits of fc united and chester (look at vauxhall motors for example).
Loving the fact that V*cs aren’t even on it :laugh: :laugh: :laugh:
So have you factored in one-off “bumper” crowds other teams on the list may have had?[/quote]
Any mathematician will tell you that it’s always worth discounting the statistical outliers, to give some perspective.
By way of example, Manchester City and Chelsea have spent fortunes on players, so looking at the big spending clubs, it’s always worth taking these out as not everyone can be bankrolled by shieks and oligarchs (oligarches?). By doing so, we can clearly see that Liverpool are the biggest spenders during the Premier League era 
Nb. comments noted Left Pegger
So have you factored in one-off “bumper” crowds other teams on the list may have had?[/quote]
Any mathematician will tell you that it’s always worth discounting the statistical outliers, to give some perspective.
By way of example, Manchester City and Chelsea have spent fortunes on players, so looking at the big spending clubs, it’s always worth taking these out as not everyone can be bankrolled by shieks and oligarchs (oligarches?). By doing so, we can clearly see that Liverpool are the biggest spenders during the Premier League era
Nb. comments noted Left Pegger ;)[/quote]
Good stuff.
But have you factored in potential bumper crowds for the other clubs on the list?
So have you factored in one-off “bumper” crowds other teams on the list may have had?[/quote]
Any mathematician will tell you that it’s always worth discounting the statistical outliers, to give some perspective.
By way of example, Manchester City and Chelsea have spent fortunes on players, so looking at the big spending clubs, it’s always worth taking these out as not everyone can be bankrolled by shieks and oligarchs (oligarches?). By doing so, we can clearly see that Liverpool are the biggest spenders during the Premier League era
Nb. comments noted Left Pegger ;)[/quote]
Good stuff.
But have you factored in potential bumper crowds for the other clubs on the list?[/quote]
There’s little point. It doesnt impact our attendances.