Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
Bryangunnshairline

20 biggest teams in English league....

Recommended Posts

Check this out, ipswich, blackburn and cardiff in it but no.mention of us!? http://www.ftbpro.com/posts/kieran.roche/22130/the-true-premier-league-20-biggest-clubs-in-the-english-leagues

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Some slightly iffy selections, but it is up to the author...not sure of his knowledge of E Anglia football, though - using the binners fan base as a ''positive'' when they are playing in a half empty stadium each week is just odd, given that we averaged 25k in League 1.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Absolute tosh.  Garbage. Waste of  cyberspace.   Says Middlesborough were founder members of the premier league.  So were we!  It says Ipsh*t''s rivals have had more success in recent years and have ''more about them''!??  Tosh of the highest order. 

 

  

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Do you mean teams as we have a fair few six footers ?

ps I wonder who the top twenty debtors are - as of the 2009/10 there were only ten PL clubs with more debt than the binners

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Come on, have you seen his photo? For a spotty thirteen year old, it''s a good effort, well done son. Just need to keep up those remedial English lessons and there could one day be a career for you in the free newspaper business.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
a bit more stupidity and an ability to copy stuff off the internet, irrespective whether it has any truth in it, and he could work for the SunI

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

To be fair, he acknowledges that the bottom 5 are fairly arguable. The other 15 are pretty decent shouts. Let''s not forget that Ipswich have won the league, the FA cup twice, and the UEFA cup. Now, in my lifetime (last 20 years), we''re probably about even, but historically, you''d probably just about put Ipswich in there above us.

Not convinced by Boro either. I''d probably swap Forest and them over.

But then for the other 4 or 5, what do you go on? History? League performances 50 or 60 years ago? Attendances? Recent history? You can put forward an argument for quite a lot of teams to be fair.

We''d be in there with that bottom 5 or so clubs in some arguments, but we are certainly not one of the biggest 15 clubs if you''re going down a history/wealth sort of combination. Yet anyway!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Aggy, you are giving the binmen a bit more success than they''ve had - just the one FA Cup, 34 years ago. Truth is, neither of us has won that much, their league success was 50 years ago, in a completely different era. It really is clutching at straws to go on about that too much, I mean, loads of sides have far more illustrious histories (eg Huddersfield, won the league 3 times + Cup + 4- times runners up].

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
track the recent history as over 25 years and you have City with 3 league titles against one for the binners and 11 years in the top flight against six on their parttake it back a year or so beforeand we won the League Cup (though even further back they did win the EUFA cup)however European participation would have been far more for us had English clubs not have been banned from Europewe even finished higher in the PL than they have. and currently we are in the PL  looking most likely to be there another season - picking up around £75m this season roughly what their current debts are (and £90m plus if they had not defrauded so many people)To claim that we have been roughly equal in recent times is well wide of the mark

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
At this moment in time, and that''s all that really matters, the 20 "biggest" teams in the English league are those in positions 1 to 20 in the Premier League - end of.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Ok Branston, I''ll concede the FA Cup point - must have misread Wikipedia on that one! And whilst I''d agree that you can''t bang on too much about history for the reasons you say, I think that past success in Europe does deserve to hold some weight, certainly more than league cups and the like. I mean we''ve only ever had 1 season in the UEFA cup, whereas they''ve had 2 seasons in it in the past two years, and between 73 and 83 there was only one season that they didn''t participate in it, whilst winning it in 81.

City 1st, I will stick by what I said in my post - in my lifetime (not some random number of "recent years" that you wish to choose), we are about equal. Since 1990, we are currently in our 5th season in the prem, having had 1 season in Europe. We''ve also had three League cup quarter finals in that time. Ipswich have also had 5 seasons in the prem, but have played twice in the UEFA cup, have got through to two League cup semi finals and an FA cup quarter final.

I don''t think, therefore, that it''s wide of the mark whatsoever to say we''re about even!

Making Plans - sort of agreed really, but I do think that things like history, fanbase/attendances and finances can come into the equation. In which case, would there be much argument between someone like Forest over taking Wigan? I doubt it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
*We''re in our 5th season in the prem, but 7th in the top flight, so we are 2 seasons up on them there, but still given their superior European and domestic cup record in the past 21 years or so I still maintain we are about equal.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

All hugely subjective stuff though-his is just one of millions of opinions, but neither his, mine, or anyones is the ''real deal''.

 

I''d base the 20 on the entire history of the clubs and football in the UK, including the 19th century--if it looks like a league title then it is a league title--so you have to include clubs like Preston, Huddersfield and Bolton on that basis.

 

Arsenal, Aston Villa, Blackburn Rovers, Bolton, Burnley, Chelsea, Derby County, Everton, Huddersfield, Leeds United, Liverpool, Man Utd, Man City, Newcastle,Nottingham Forest, Preston, Sheffield Wednesday, Sunderland, Tottenham, Wolves.

 

Its a fair argument that winning a league title in 1899 means little or nothing today of course. But if you''re basing it on the criteria of trophies, then it counts!

 

Like I said, massively subjective and if you were to do the same list based on the last 20 years (the Premier League, or when football began according to some pundits, mentioning no names, Clive Tyldesley) then we''d perhaps squeak in-and definitely would if it was last 40 years.

 

Interesting.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Aggy, you fell into the odd thing that is the wiki page on the binmen - for some reason theirs itemises way more than is necessary (including Youth) but not for us. It does rather make them look more successful than they were.

They undoubtedly had a decent spell around the late 70s/early 80s under Bobby Robson (as a ten year old I happened to be staying with rellies in ipswich and saw them parade the uefa cup) in the era when money wasn''t everything - but thankfully that pretty-much went to pot after he left!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
surely by definition successfull clubs are those that attract highest attendances, ie. , are most popular with the football watching public. if a team is winning trophys then it will automatically generate spectator interest, but for those teams not wining, or very rarely, then the gauge must be bums on seats. all of which puts us comfortably in the top 20. [:D]

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
And yet it''s still much more of a spell than we have ever had! Just saying ;) I was just going off typing "List of Ipswich Town seasons" into Wiki, so if it''s wrong blame that!!

Shuck - I would perhaps limit it to post-war, as that''s where a lot of the "official" records go from.

If I was going to try and do some sort of a points-based thing to assess the "biggest" clubs based on history, then I''d probably do a sliding scale - for instance, maybe 1 point for an FA Cup win in the 40s, 2 points for an FA cup win in the 60s, 3 for 80s, 4 for 90s and 2000s. That then means more distant success has less impact on current "bigness" so to speak than more recent success. But the size of a club is extremely subjective once you get outside of the very top few teams.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
"City 1st, I will stick by what I said in my post - in my lifetime (not

some random number of "recent years" that you wish to choose)
"

There is nothing ''

random'' about extending your twenty years to

include one of the successful eras of our time. Taken that as a whole,

not random as 1985 -1989 is the natural order everywhere else, you then

have the facts I quoted. Which rather puts the paupers in a far

lesser light.

For us that has meant more trophies, more time in the top tier, more European football and even their an FA cup quarter final is overshadowed by our two FA Cup semi finals.

Even on games won it is 14-11 to us."Since 1990, we are currently in our 5th season in the prem"Weasel words, as well you know. It is the time in the highest league that is judged, not it''s name which means we are currently in our 7th season in the top tier - 11 if you use the bench mark I have suggested.Why you should choose to misrepresent our past in a debate about the comparative achievements of the recent past only you can know ... and the rest of us can gues at.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I did post directly underneath that post saying it was indeed our 7th season in the top flight. Unfortunately without an edit button, I couldn''t change the initial post. So far from a deliberate misrepresentation because I''m actually an undercover binner, perhaps you should read the rest of the posts in the thread first!

As for your argument for going back to 85, well you criticised my post, saying that I was "well wide of the mark" to say we had been equal in "recent times". I had never said "recent times." I said in my lifetime.

Now unless I''ve suddenly aged 5 years, I''m not quite sure why you want to go back to 85 to try and disprove the fairly equal standings in my lifetime, given that I was, as I made clear, not born until 1990! As such, I''m not quite sure what grounds you have for dismissing my post as "well-wide of the mark." Again, perhaps you ought to read the posts properly before dismissing them?

Finally, why have you decided that "recent times" only goes back to 85? Why not go back a further 3 years and include the UEFA cup appearances Ipswich had then? Why not another 10 years and have the Ipswich UEFA cup win and their run of UEFA cup appearances? This is rather the point, you have subjectively chosen your dates because it makes us look like the bigger club. Whereas an Ipswich fan might chose to go back to 73, or even 1980, and show their superior European cup record as an argument for them being the bigger club in recent years.

I am simply trying to be objective, and - as I said in my original post - in my lifetime, we are about equal. The only things I can see the point in having a discussion on from my point of view are either the FULL histories of the clubs, or what I can comment on from my own lifetime. For me, 1985 is a random date. It would be totally biased for me to chose that in this discussion, because it would be massively skewed towards Norwich.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
The guys is an idiot. He has just wishy-washy decided on how big a club is by how big he thinks it is by what the name means to him. For starters, he should have defined "big". In most businesses, so why not this footballing one, it should be some composite of annual turnover and number of fans. What a team has won is arguably irrelavent. Perhaps he & some posters here are getting "big" confused with "successful". He''s decided that Fulham is the 20th biggest club because it is one of the oldest. Whoop !It seems to me that he''s just thought of 20 well known clubs and chatted a bit about them.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
" For me, 1985 is a random date. It would be totally biased for me to

chose that in this discussion, because it would be massively skewed

towards Norwich"
Perhaps it is your age where the word random has to be included irrespective of it''s relevance. We won a major trophy and we relegated in 1985. That is NOT random it is a reasoned bench mark to chose rather than your birthdate which I would suggest had little part to play in City''s achievements, nor did their achievements play much part in your life until we were relegated in ''95."you have subjectively chosen your dates because it makes us look like the bigger club"No I have stated that using a more recognisable time frame ie 25 years is a better basis for measurement. If "what I can comment on from my own lifetime" were to be taken to it''s logical conclusion it would be that part of the season that you were actually born, not the whole season. I would venture to add that were you to be making a comparison based on ''since I have been watching City'' then fine but a date of birth seems absurd.As to the size of the club that is also pretty absurd either as it is a pretty meaningless claim. So what if Newcastle are a bigger club that us. They have achieved bugger all for their size in relative terms. Bristol is a about the seventh largest City in England but has never produced a successful club. Where does it end ?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

[quote user="K Lo"]The guys is an idiot. He has just wishy-washy decided on how big a club is by how big he thinks it is by what the name means to him. For starters, he should have defined "big". In most businesses, so why not this footballing one, it should be some composite of annual turnover and number of fans. What a team has won is arguably irrelavent. Perhaps he & some posters here are getting "big" confused with "successful". He''s decided that Fulham is the 20th biggest club because it is one of the oldest. Whoop !

It seems to me that he''s just thought of 20 well known clubs and chatted a bit about them.
[/quote]

 

I thought this was the clue as to why Fulham are there:

 

"Although I am a Fulham fan..."

 


 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
>> "I am simply trying to be objective"Aggy, having just passed your second anniversary on the PinkUn, have you not realised yet that your sort aren''t wanted round these parts?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Ah well, now then, we can argue about criteria and time frames til the cows come home City1st. 1985 isn''t 25 years ago. So what basis is it a good point to start it from, unless you are choosing one subjectively that sees Ipswich start to decline and us come good in the following years? Why 25 years and not 30 (which would incorporate some of Ipswich''s most successful ever seasons)?

I''m not sure what absurd point you are trying to make about my birth date. When did I say my birth impacted Norwich''s fortunes? What I have maintained throughout, is that to be objective in trying to find some criteria for a "big" club, you either use the entire history of a club, or you discuss things that have happened in your own lifetime. Otherwise it becomes all subjective. What is "recent", 25 or 30 years? Is 25 years really recent at all? Objectively you look at the entire history.

The reason I have used my date of birth was purely because that''s a fairly standard thing to use. I don''t think it''s uncommon for people to say that "in my lifetime such and such....". I could indeed begin it from a point that I remember following the club, and not when I was born, but then I can remember bits of some seasons, and memorable games, whilst I can''t remember the others. Similarly, I can''t remember some aspects of 5 or 6 seasons ago. So why not choose the point at which I came into existence?

All of those points though are discussions about criteria. If your initial response to me had been "I disagree that your birth is a good time to start, we should choose 1985 instead" then I wouldn''t have had much problem, although I may have disagreed with the subjectivity of your criteria.

However, you didn''t say that. You dismissed my post as being "well wide of the mark". I''ll ask again (as you seem to have ignored the question from my previous post), why was anything in my initial post "well wide of the mark"? I gave my criteria for a "big club" and then showed why I thought Ipswich and Norwich were about even within the confines of that criteria. You then told me I was well wide of the mark, without seemingly paying any attention to why I had said it. So why was anything in my first post "well wide of the mark", as you claim it to be?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Haha Nuff. I didn''t post on here properly until a few months back. After reading a few threads recently I am beginning to remember why!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Sorry for the triple post - really need an edit button! But just read K Los post - annual turnover or some other financial yardstick is probably the best way to define the size of a club in today''s world. Will a player go to a club with history or larger attendances, rather than a club who is offering him an extra 10k a week? Probably not.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 1Man Utd 314976
 2Man City 315071
 3Arsenal 312158
 4Tottenham 312058
 5Chelsea 311753
 6Newcastle 31453
 7Everton 31043
 8Liverpool 31342
 9Sunderland 31541
 10Fulham 31-339
 11Swansea 31-439
 12Norwich 31-739
 13Stoke 31-1438
 14West Brom 31-736
 15Aston Villa 30-933
 16Bolton 30-2429
 17QPR 31-1928
 18Blackburn 31-2128
 19Wigan 31-2628
 20Wolves 31-3522

Shock horror!

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  

×
×
  • Create New...