Where were NUFC fans before 1992?


Status
Not open for further replies.
First season I started going to Roker was 69-70, we had the third lowest average crowd in the division - 21,790. Only Ipswich & Burnley had less. The Mags were up at 37,500.
 
First season I started going to Roker was 69-70, we had the third lowest average crowd in the division - 21,790. Only Ipswich & Burnley had less. The Mags were up at 37,500.
The facts are that we are both followed on big numbers. They probably picked up a few due to their resurgence under Keegan and we picked up ours due to a new stadium and we also had some our best moments over the last 50 years in the SOLS early days.
The problem with sunderland and Newcastle fans is that they seem to believe because they get big numbers through the gates it makes them big clubs when the results over a significant period says we are nothing more than also rans.
 
Genuine question. Were they people just not that interested in football before Sky and Keegan sexed it up for them, or were there loads of traitors from around the North East that defected?

They were Sunderland supporters. Also Hall played a blinder braying out all this Geordie Nation shite enticing kids from not just the North East area but from all around the country who wanted to see attacking football and a hint of success. Look at all the plastic Mags like Fat Beefy, Graeme Swann and Tony Blair.
 
The facts are that we are both followed on big numbers. They probably picked up a few due to their resurgence under Keegan and we picked up ours due to a new stadium and we also had some our best moments over the last 50 years in the SOLS early days.
The problem with sunderland and Newcastle fans is that they seem to believe because they get big numbers through the gates it makes them big clubs when the results over a significant period says we are nothing more than also rans.
They don't, they think it is reasonable to assume, given the numbers that pour through the gate, that they might get half a team to be proud of every now and then.

The fact they haven't and they still come means they are superb supporters. If they had a sense of entitlement then there would be 10,000 there as the rest would have gone to boil their heads.
 
They were Sunderland supporters. Also Hall played a blinder braying out all this Geordie Nation shite enticing kids from not just the North East area but from all around the country who wanted to see attacking football and a hint of success. Look at all the plastic Mags like Fat Beefy, Graeme Swann and Tony Blair.

Newcastle's gates have historically been higher than ours on average. I don't subscribe to the argument that thousands chucked out their Sunderland scarfs and were lured in by Keegan.

What Newcastle did do was cultivate an interest among young people and those who were previously uninterested. It was easy to do this with their better team, stadium, city and media image. The gap between the two clubs in the 90s was vast but we wrestled back a lot of the lost ground in terms of support with the opening of a new stadium as it made football a more attractive pass time for families here - Reid's team also helped matters.

We are probably back at our natural levels now in terms of the numbers that follow both clubs
 
They don't, they think it is reasonable to assume, given the numbers that pour through the gate, that they might get half a team to be proud of every now and then.

The fact they haven't and they still come means they are superb supporters. If they had a sense of entitlement then there would be 10,000 there as the rest would have gone to boil their heads.
Just because we get big numbers doesn't mean we have any more right to have a half decent team than any other club.
 
Both clubs have spunked an unbelievable amount of money in the last 25yrs with limited results. The skunks more so. Any other industry and this would be catastrophic but football bounces back, time after time. It's unique I guess ( unless you are Leeds )
 
Facts are in my signature fellas. 15 years either side of the 'watershed moment' in the uplift (our formation vs your stadium move)

f***ing 1997ers.

What do those stats in your signature actually prove? If I've read them correctly your 92% was at a time when you's were doing really well (glory hunters), whereas our increase was at a time when we'd just been relegated to the Championship (failure hunters?)?
 
I agree. But given we do and the resources available to both clubs, it is not reasonable to expect us to be half decent/competitive?
We are both historically ( last 50 year other than mags spell under Keegan) bottom end top flight clubs. The mags and us were up and down like shithouse seats in 80s and 90s and have both been relegated in 2000s as well. Players aren't keen on coming up here either which is another issue. As for resource with the sky money now being the major player when it comes to revenue for all clubs outside the big boys the fact we get more fans than likes of Stoke and Leicester is becoming less and less relevant.
 
Genuine question. Were they people just not that interested in football before Sky and Keegan sexed it up for them, or were there loads of traitors from around the North East that defected?

I'll never forget Ant & Dec on a Saturday morning show "Wove been followin N'Cassil ever since Denis Smith was manager". Bit young to mean Jim Smith I think...
 
Genuine question. Were they people just not that interested in football before Sky and Keegan sexed it up for them, or were there loads of traitors from around the North East that defected?
They were still evolving deep within the chasms behind Byker Wall. A great wizard by the name of Kevin Keegan of Southampton Lay- By appeared and sprinkled stardust on them, and lo and behold from below the rocks and shit crawled these creatures that were to be named, the toon army.
 
The facts are that we are both followed on big numbers. They probably picked up a few due to their resurgence under Keegan and we picked up ours due to a new stadium and we also had some our best moments over the last 50 years in the SOLS early days.
The problem with sunderland and Newcastle fans is that they seem to believe because they get big numbers through the gates it makes them big clubs when the results over a significant period says we are nothing more than also rans.

The Mags 1991 season saw them being watch by crowds of 20k at the beginning of the season however as the season went on that figure went down to around 13k being topped off with a massive 9k v Crewe...This all happened just before the John Hall (Geordie Nation Kevin Keegan days of 1992)
 
What do those stats in your signature actually prove? If I've read them correctly your 92% was at a time when you's were doing really well (glory hunters), whereas our increase was at a time when we'd just been relegated to the Championship (failure hunters?)?

Our 92% started when we just avoided relegation to the old Division 3 the previous year. They were both on the back of poor seasons tbf.

iirc pre our 1992 formation we had higher average than you on more seasons than you had on us.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top