SaintJames
Well-known Exeweb poster
- Joined
- Dec 3, 2020
- Messages
- 5,233
Good post Rosey. It's hard for anyone under 40 who is a City fan to truly understand or even to believe just how crap we were particularly in the twenty years before Trust ownership (with the exception of 89/90). I have three boys, two of whom work for the club and to try to explain that for almost the entirety of our history (aside from the last 15 years) we almost always finished in the bottom ten of League Two. To understand that getting a crowd in excess of 3,000 was for many years unheard of and that when I travelled away I may only see an occasional win and often saw that match with less than 50 City fans present. They look at me like I'm an alien from outer space. The only good thing back then was that you were always guaranteed a pasty and we never ran out at half timeIt can be hard to pinpoint the word "nadir" when it comes City's history. 1994/95 would certainly be a strong candidate and then 2002/03 happened. The mid/late 80's would be a candidate from an attendance point of view although that was more a general malaise in English football as a whole.
At the time you pick 2002/03 as the absolute low point but now you can see it was the shock that kick started a revival. We also had a better side that season than in 1994/95. 94/95 was a low point followed by a false dawn. That is why I question whether there would have been the support to get us through that period had we been relegated.
It can be a warning from history in a "be grateful for what you've got" kind of way but really should be used in "look how far we have come" context. Then we can still look at how far we can still go.