Install the app
How to install the app on iOS

Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.

Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.

 

New Everton Stadium

terryefc said:
Chelsea have a massive support base - certainly on a par if not in excess of Spurs. Easily the biggest club in SE / SW London and spreading to all home counties including Berks, Surrey, Sussex. Added to that are the substantial tourists who go to Stamford Bridge. They'd have no problem filling 65k - but would hopefully drop their prices so more locals could go.
Click to expand...

Thing about the likes of SPurs compared to Chelsea mate, if spurs go through a bad few years they will still be maxing out their stadium as they have a huge base of hardcore supporters, Chelsea go through a similar barren span then you will see just how big their true supporter base is, and a 65k stadium would be half empty
 
roydo said:
Funnily enough, this was talked about on Hawksbee and Jacobs today. Jacobs, (a massive Chelsea fan) said that the fact remains, that Chelseas core support of 40 to 50 year olds is nowhere near as solid as the other PL London clubs because of the rep their hooligans engendered in the 80s.

Basically, swathes of youngsters back then opted for other London clubs instead of Chelsea.

Also, they wernt very good.

So, in conclusion, their history pre PL was pretty patchy. Hence their core support now. In London/SE anyrate.
Click to expand...

re writing of history to blame it all on the hooligan element why they arent as big really
 
Chelsea were a mess and have been for most of their existence before first Harding and then RA ploughed in the cash. For younger readers that may have not had the pleasure (well if you like being poked in the eye with a sharp stick) of seeing stamford bridge before it was updated in the 90's here it is:

Screenshot_20170115-093847.webp


They had won 5 trophies up until the nineties, it's easy to see why most of the older supporters follow Arsenal or Spurs. Their new stadium is a game changer for them though, it will ensure that they remain a big club in this country. I was hoping Abramovich would have got bored and sold up before getting round to building it.
 

Toffeeslam said:
Have to agree to disagree on this, having lived in west London for best part of 20 years they share a catchment area with QPR, Fulham and Brentford all of which have solid if not massive support. from my time here and speaking and meeting fans here not many more Chelsea fans than the other clubs but Spurs and Arsenal command massive support in London and outside too.

Even WHU rival Chelsea in support
Click to expand...

I can't stand Chelsea as a club but the facts are in terms of attendance they hold their own. Not sure where the base stats for the below link come from but it's a decent indicator. Obviously there are factors to consider such as us and many others had a few years of low attendances simply due to being pioneers.

Chelsea are way ahead of West Ham. WH highest attendance before they moved was only just over 40k, they are no-marks in football terms.

http://www.nufc.com/2016-17html/attendance-all-time.html


attendances-all-time.gif
 
MickA said:
I can't stand Chelsea as a club but the facts are in terms of attendance they hold their own. Not sure where the base stats for the below link come from but it's a decent indicator. Obviously there are factors to consider such as us and many others had a few years of low attendances simply due to being pioneers.

Chelsea are way ahead of West Ham. WH highest attendance before they moved was only just over 40k, they are no-marks in football terms.

http://www.nufc.com/2016-17html/attendance-all-time.html


attendances-all-time.gif
Click to expand...
Middlesbrough Ironopolis, so hip, so niche.
 
The binman chronicles said:
Chelsea were a mess and have been for most of their existence before first Harding and then RA ploughed in the cash. For younger readers that may have not had the pleasure (well if you like being poked in the eye with a sharp stick) of seeing stamford bridge before it was updated in the 90's here it is:

View attachment 33368

They had won 5 trophies up until the nineties, it's easy to see why most of the older supporters follow Arsenal or Spurs. Their new stadium is a game changer for them though, it will ensure that they remain a big club in this country. I was hoping Abramovich would have got bored and sold up before getting round to building it.
Click to expand...

That isn't really a bad stadium to be honest.
 

MickA said:
I can't stand Chelsea as a club but the facts are in terms of attendance they hold their own. Not sure where the base stats for the below link come from but it's a decent indicator. Obviously there are factors to consider such as us and many others had a few years of low attendances simply due to being pioneers.

Chelsea are way ahead of West Ham. WH highest attendance before they moved was only just over 40k, they are no-marks in football terms.
Click to expand...

Have deleted that table to make the post a bit shorter. That table is flawed despite being factual. Both Chelsea and Tottenhams attendances only start from 1906 and 1909 respectively which massively influences the average. For example at the start of the 1890's we were getting 10k crowds and by 1909 when Spurs started, they were up to 23k.

Post War Newcastle are 4th, us 5th and Spurs 6th. There was a table going round a while back.

Having said that, Chelsea's "fanbase" is huge now and the fact that their crowds used to be poor in the 80's is now irrelevant. They aren't going to turn in to a bad team with no finances and since Abramovic took over, they have been the most successful team in the Country. They will easily fill 65,000 with hordes of glory hunters and tourists helping out if the normal fans are struggling to afford it.
 
EFC78 said:
Have deleted that table to make the post a bit shorter. That table is flawed despite being factual. Both Chelsea and Tottenhams attendances only start from 1906 and 1909 respectively which massively influences the average. For example at the start of the 1890's we were getting 10k crowds and by 1909 when Spurs started, they were up to 23k.

Post War Newcastle are 4th, us 5th and Spurs 6th. There was a table going round a while back.

Having said that, Chelsea's "fanbase" is huge now and the fact that their crowds used to be poor in the 80's is now irrelevant. They aren't going to turn in to a bad team with no finances and since Abramovic took over, they have been the most successful team in the Country. They will easily fill 65,000 with hordes of glory hunters and tourists helping out if the normal fans are struggling to afford it.
Click to expand...

Yeah agree with all that. I think with new stadia and clubs in the 21st century people too easily compare clubs as if the circumstances are like for like when they should take each example on it's own circumstances.

Chelsea, like Tottenham, will easily fill 60k and if we build our stadium we can fill 60k too though the methods used will no doubt be vastly different.
 

Welcome to GrandOldTeam

Get involved. Registration is simple and free.

Register
Back
Top