All time league table of English league teams based on their end of season positions

[Cyclops]

You should factor in FA Cup results too for a complete picture.
How did you count the North/South leagues?
Wimbledon's position can't be right.....

[Eric the Half a Bee]

You should factor in FA Cup results too for a complete picture.
How did you count the North/South leagues?
Wimbledon's position can't be right.....

Yes, FA cup is my next step. My gut feeling is that, despite winning it, making 2 finals and a couple of semis, our record isn't great in it, given the time spent in the top flight.

North and South was given equal ranking, so 1st in each would have been 45th with 2 divisions of 22 sides. Thinking about it, perhaps a position gap would be better. 45th for first in both, 47th for 2nd etc. That gives virtually the same weighting as 4 divisions.

Haven't bothered with non-league. I'd be there for days!

[lardy]

You should factor in FA Cup results too for a complete picture.
How did you count the North/South leagues?
Wimbledon's position can't be right.....

Wimbledon spent longer in the top division than it took them to get promoted, so it seems right to me. Think it was about 10 years to get there and they stayed for 15 years.

[Cowbridge Blue]

Well done, Eric, you produce some really interesting stuff for us

Much appreciated

[splott parker]

Fascinating stuff, love statistics like this

[Cyclops]

Wimbledon spent longer in the top division than it took them to get promoted, so it seems right to me. Think it was about 10 years to get there and they stayed for 15 years.

Didn't realise Wimbledon were in the top flight for so long - 14 years. But they didn't get into the Football League until 1977. Portsmouth were in the First Division/Premiership for more seasons and have been in the FL since the 1920-1921 season. They must have a better record than Wimbledon.

[the other bob wilson]

Didn't realise Wimbledon were in the top flight for so long - 14 years. But they didn't get into the Football League until 1977. Portsmouth were in the First Division/Premiership for more seasons and have been in the FL since the 1920-1921 season. They must have a better record than Wimbledon.

Apologies to Eric if I've got this wrong, but I think he's going by an average finish per season in the one to ninety two league structure. Therefore, a team like Wimbledon that only had something like thirty seasons in the Football League would have a higher average finishing position than a team like Portsmouth over their long Football League history because they spent so much of their time as a league club in the First division/Premier League.

If that's right, our average finishing position since 1920 is something like seventeenth in the second tier.

[lardy]

Didn't realise Wimbledon were in the top flight for so long - 14 years. But they didn't get into the Football League until 1977. Portsmouth were in the First Division/Premiership for more seasons and have been in the FL since the 1920-1921 season. They must have a better record than Wimbledon.

But it's an average. 15 seasons out of 30 would be better than 48 seasons out of 100.

[Allez Allez Allez]

But it's an average. 15 seasons out of 30 would be better than 48 seasons out of 100.

There has to be an element of weighting for this table to work.

Best way to do it, in my opinion would be to rank points won in the top flight * 4, championship * 3, League 1 * 2 and League 2 * 1

[the other bob wilson]

There has to be an element of weighting for this table to work.

Best way to do it, in my opinion would be to rank points won in the top flight * 4, championship * 3, League 1 * 2 and League 2 * 1

Don't you think it's unfair to Eric, who must have put an awful lot of work into producing the table, to have people telling him how he has got it wrong?

[Allez Allez Allez]

Don't you think it's unfair to Eric, who must have put an awful lot of work into producing the table, to have people telling him how he has got it wrong?

Are you saying that, because someone has put a lot of work into something, that it cannot be questioned? The list has been passed off as being scientific, and it is to a degree, but isn't the list supposed to be the average position over the lifetime of the league? In which case, Wimbledon, Wigan, and even Morecambe and Kidderminster are in false positions.

[lardy]

There has to be an element of weighting for this table to work.

Best way to do it, in my opinion would be to rank points won in the top flight * 4, championship * 3, League 1 * 2 and League 2 * 1

Go for it.

[Toadstool]

There has to be an element of weighting for this table to work.

Best way to do it, in my opinion would be to rank points won in the top flight * 4, championship * 3, League 1 * 2 and League 2 * 1

what about when point changed from 2 to 3 for a win?