and the best supported Team in League 2 is............

[BelizeHatter]

https://www.somersetlive.co.uk/sport/football/24-league-two-clubs-ranked-1363632

Shocked too but 46% of the population attending is pretty impressive.

 

[Andy Proctor]

This isn't exactly fair to vale when stoke are in the same city getting 29000 and Notts county when forest are getting over 20000 and obviously Barnet who have ridiculous amounts of far bigger teams near by

 

[shoddycollins]

population of Nailsworth... A bit misleading, would be better to just use populations within say 20 miles of the ground (excluding areas closer to another stadium). Places like Carlisle, Lincoln, Chesterfield, Exeter etc, are of broadly similar size but can vary a lot depending where you say the boundary is. Should Luton include Dunstable? Grimsby definitely can't just be Cleethorpes, and if you are using strict definitions of council boundaries then why do it for Grimsby but then not include the outlying areas of Carlisle. Or why restrict Grimsby to Cleethorpes but not do the same for port vale and Burslem?

 

[Look Out There Are Llamas]

Horrible methodology, plus Barnet don't play in Barnet.

 

[valefan16]

Ours uses Stoke rather than Burslem which is a bit unfair with the lardies in the city.

 

[BlackHaddock]

If you actually look at a map you will see that Grimsby and Cleethorpes are really two towns surrounded on three sides by the Sea and Humber estuary. So we only have one quarter of a segment (of land) to gleam supporters from.

If you then realise that the land I am talking about is full of carrots, spuds and peas; not people. You will all quickly see why we are second in this table, but should in fact be top!

 

[Amber Nectar]

No reasonable logic has been used to compile that list and is littered with contradictions. Way to many factors would be required to somehow compile a more logical list.

 

[shoddycollins]

It seems disingenuous to suggest that Cheltenham and Wycombe's attendances should be higher, even though both teams are relatively recent additions to the league from mostly posh/rugby areas and in Wycombe's case that population seems a little on the high side and possibly includes a chunk of generic London sprawl populated by people with little real connection to the town of Wycombe.

 

[Buxton Vale]

meaningless stats

 

[Laker]

I reckon our catchment area totals somewhere around half a million people so our attendances are shite. It’s what happens when your area is ludicrously middle class and I’m not just restricting that to Cambridge either - south Cambridgeshire, west Suffolk, north Herts is all pretty affluent. Also many people who live in Cambridge don’t come from Cambridge originally so have no connection to the club.

The university runs our city and would be happy for us not to exist. Therefore we’ve had no backing and consequently growing the club has been very difficult. Throw into the mix an asset grabbing nob as a chairman 15 years ago and the club is not perceived in the best light locally.

 

[GTFCfish]

Shove that up your arse Lincoln City, we are the Cleethorpes massive........

 

[Luke Imp]

I think if you throw in the surrounding areas of Lincoln, we're at about 135,000.

 

[shoddycollins]

Also many people who live in Cambridge don’t come from Cambridge originally so have no connection to the club.

Full of filthy off-comers like Habbinalan

 

[JJ1532]

People wonder why print journalism and papers are dying. This is why, when this passes as journalism. What a lazy, error ridden piece which doesn't come close to telling us anything about any of the respective fan bases.

 

[The Jovial Forester]

Can't argue with science, you tinpot fuckers

 

[That Fat Centre Half]

People wonder why print journalism and papers are dying. This is why, when this passes as journalism. What a lazy, error ridden piece which doesn't come close to telling us anything about any of the respective fan bases.

I mean, its clearly just a fluff piece thats not meant to be taken all that seriously.

Not everything has to be HARD HITTING journalism.

 

[Trapdoor]

Considering our actual catchment area is over 1 million people i think our stats are way too good.

 

[Luke Imp]

Somerset Live has been full of them articles all season. Attendance ones, transfers one - there was even a fair play one.

Always ending the headlines in something like 'INCLUDING COVENTRY, LUTON AND LINCOLN' so it makes its way onto Newsnow feeds and encourages clicks.

 

[Habbinalan]

I mean, its clearly just a fluff piece thats not meant to be taken all that seriously.

Not everything has to be HARD HITTING journalism.

It's another load of syndicated/plagiarised toss but.....

Full of filthy off-comers like Habbinalan

Also many people who live in Cambridge don’t come from Cambridge originally so have no connection to the club.

I suspect that the majority, possibly as much as 70%, of our support (regular and occasional) don't come from the city of Cambridge. Apart from our notable supporters from Surrey, Yorkshire, Nottingham and Seattle (owner), most of the Habbinites that I know are (like me) from South Cambs commuter land or further out.

The university runs our city and would be happy for us not to exist. Therefore we’ve had no backing and consequently growing the club has been very difficult....

I have to say I think the penny finally dropped for us with our failed planning application for a new stadium in Trumpington NIMBY-land south of the city.

Building of the "community club & asset" brand, combined with highlighting the Abbey ward as being in the 20% most deprived wards in the country (contrasting with the rest of the city and surrounding wealth) and bringing some of the pharma companies and university connected businesses on board (either as directors or through the community trust) has probably maximised our chances of getting a sustainable re-development of the Abbey, rather than moving to a new soulless out of town stadium.

We still need to disentangle from our landlord and get the finances right but I see more potential for our approach (tapping income from relatively well-off families and corporate) to grow crowds with only modest success and progression on the field than any other L1/L2 club apart from Lincoln. We're not competing with other football clubs for a lot of that potential income and support.

 

[PUSBCCFC]

Laughable article. I'm surprised they didn't put the population of Greater London for Barnet or add the number of arrivals at Gatwick for Crawley.

 

[shoddycollins]

Laughable article. I'm surprised they didn't put the population of Greater London for Barnet or add the number of arrivals at Gatwick for Crawley.

In keeping with Dale Vince's vision of FGR as a global club they should really have included the entire population of the Earth for them.

 

[mowgli]

It seems disingenuous to suggest that Cheltenham and Wycombe's attendances should be higher, even though both teams are relatively recent additions to the league from mostly posh/rugby areas and in Wycombe's case that population seems a little on the high side and possibly includes a chunk of generic London sprawl populated by people with little real connection to the town of Wycombe.

Too many football fans in High Wycombe are glory hunters and support London Premier League teams which have good public transport as it's only 30 minutes on the train to the centre of London.

 

[The Jovial Forester]

We of course have to share the football hotbed of Nailsworth with Shortwood United as well, so don't know what all this quibbling is about.

 

[shoddycollins]

Because I'm sure you've all been wondering if there's a better way to do this than just to use the populations of whatever official boundary happens to have been used by the first result when googling the name of the town I have worked out the populations for each club that live within 5 miles of the ground, and don't live closer to any other ground (using the grounds of every club with an average attendance over 1000).

It's still not perfect of course, and for similar reasons to previous but at least you know where the numbers have come from and it's not a measure of the club's true catchment area, that's a lot more complicated. It's just a number that you can say, 'that at least gives me some information about the club's surroundings'.

Barnet (Underhill) - 439,392 (obviously still very large and straying into Arsenal and Tottenham territory)
Coventry - 418,947
Notts County - 406,531 (since Meadow Lane is slightly closer to the city centre than the City Ground, this is almost the entire population of Nottingham)
Luton - 295,526
Port Vale - 217,199 (probably a bit fairer than using the whole of Stoke although there are still more people in Vale's area than in City's)
Swindon - 215,159
Mansfield - 211,278
Cambridge - 184,083
Chesterfield - 159,951
Colchester - 154,934
Lincoln - 152,650
Wycombe - 148,316
Exeter - 147,469
Crawley - 146,165
Cheltenham - 145,906
Newport - 145.719
Grimsby - 144,178
Stevenage - 137,307
Crewe - 129,119
Morecambe - 117,407
Accrington - 110,567
Carlisle - 90,731
FGR - 73,138
Yeovil - 70,797

 

[Greenacres]

We of course have to share the football hotbed of Nailsworth with Shortwood United as well, so don't know what all this quibbling is about.

This is of course absolutely true, Shortwood shouldn't be forgotten at all, Nailsworth must be one of the few places where the entire population can easily fit inside its football stadiums.

 

[Indian Dan]

I’ll put me hard hat on for this, but it’s true.

Some places population has grown on the back of high levels of immigration - almost entirely those that have no interest in the beautiful game. There is a large Goan population in Swindon who wouldn’t be seen dead going to the CG.

Got to hand it to them, though, they have sense!

 

[GTFCfish]

A Bit unfair on Barnet that as they have giants such as Arsenal Spurs and Borehamwood right on their doorstep.