26th best side in England, ever..

http://www.statto.com/football/stats/england/all-time-table

 

What if you relate the table to PPG though?

As we all know that is the only stat to revert to....

 

50th, according to this one: http://coachdaveblog.blogspot.co.uk/2013/10/since-waybefore-advent-of-premier.html

 

Well, we've garnered 4,864 points, from 4,508 games. Some mathematician can work it out for us.

 

Its pretty poor really if you look at the amount of games we've played compared to others. Goal difference is abysmal as well. Not that it means anything.

 

That one's ****. Way too many points offered for size of city, size of ground, catchment area etc and not enough for the history of the club. E.g. Hull City - never won a carrot and only ever reached one cup final. Spent most of their lives in the lower leagues. Compared to Blackpool who have been in the top flight more years, won the Cup etc. I'd say Blackpool were a bigger club than Hull.

 

We drop to 98th position...bout right

 

That ones completely ********. Same ranking as Bury?

 

That's because we've spent 90% of our time as a struggling 2nd tier club.
Most people on here said they would rather struggle along in the 2nd tier than be in the top half of the ale-house league.

 

5th best side in next seasons third tier, based on that table.

Behind Sheff Utd, PNE, Notts County and Bristol City.

 

=50 with Bury. What a load of cack.

 

They're 21st (above us) in the statto one I linked.

To be fair, they've won the FA Cup twice, won the second tier title, spent 22 seasons in the top flight (finished 5th once).

Ok, it's all back in the embryonic stages of English football, but it's there.

 

Look at their history and then ours. They've done/achieved more than us.

 

It just goes to show that stats are pretty meaningless. Back in time teams like Wanderers FC, The Royal Engineers, Clapham Rovers and even The Old Etonians won the FA cup at least as many times as the mighty BFC.

 

But no team below us in the all time points table has played as many games as us, whilst 10 of the 25 above us have played less games than us. Furthermore, almost all the teams above us have played a considerable chunk of their games in the top flight.

 

It's good for a discussion though, mate.

 

I've looked for better attempts at making an all time table, but found none. It's not perfect (the statto one) for the reasons you've given. If I had a spare day or two to compile my own list using what I believe to be the fairest barometers, I'd do it. But I haven't the spare time.

 

Higher than Spurs and Leeds. It's ********. Appears to take no consideration of the fact that Spurs have been playing far better sides than we have for years.

 

Exactly, it's flawed. It's just based on wins/points.

 

I mentioned on the thread about Johnny Hendrie that I'd put together a spreadsheet a few years ago that was just based on the years i've been watching the Reds (since 76-77) and looked at a few ways of ranking the teams. It was based on how many years in each division and things like that. I found it over the weekend, but it's a few years out of date, so I'll update it and shove it on here. Took ages though, so I'm not going to be taking it right back to 1888! The different variations I used had us at the bottom end of the second flight or the top end of the third flight, although had i taken it back 15 years we would have fared worse, as we spent the bulk of that time in the lower leagues.