Newcastle a big club ?

astrofool · 14-01-2008 10:58PM

kinaldo wrote: »

Yes, football did exist before the players in the Premiership were born.

Fixed that for you.

There's only 4 big clubs in Britain, Liverpool, Manu, Arsenal, Celtic. The rest aren't big (Rangers come closest imo). Spain only really have 2 (Barca, Real), Germany 1 (Bayern), Italy 3 (A.C., Juve, Inter), France and The Netherlands have 1 a piece (Lyon, Ajax).

therecklessone · 14-01-2008 11:14PM

astrofool wrote: »

Fixed that for you.

There's only 4 big clubs in Britain, Liverpool, Manu, Arsenal, Celtic. The rest aren't big (Rangers come closest imo). Spain only really have 2 (Barca, Real), Germany 1 (Bayern), Italy 3 (A.C., Juve, Inter), France and The Netherlands have 1 a piece (Lyon, Ajax).

Ajax the only Dutch team? PSV have won 6 of the last 8 Eredivisie titles, finishing 2nd to Ajax in the other 2.

Celtic are but Ranger aren't? Rangers have 51 league titles to Celtic's 41.

France's "big club" Lyon have won all of their titles in this decade...Saint-Étienne, Marseille, Nantes, and Monaco have all won more.

If we only count recent performances then Chelsea must rank ahead of Liverpool?

:rolleyes:

Mr.Nice Guy · 14-01-2008 11:57PM

No they're not a big club.

They like to think they are but their trophy cabinet suggests otherwise.

Big chip on their shoulder though...

astrofool · 14-01-2008 11:58PM

Celtic are the bigger club than Rangers, more support, and european success, Rangers are on the cusp of it though. Even through Rangers 9 in a row, Celtic were the bigger club, and would have more power on european football matters (I don't particularly like Celtic myself).

Ajax are the big dutch team, it would take many years of PSV staying ahead and growing their fanbase to compete with them.

Lyon, I'll give you, but they're the only french club thats mattering these days, esp. at a european level. If they aren't a big club, then France has none

Marseille would have been if it wasn't for what happened at the start of the last decade.

Anyway, on recent or past performances, Newcastle aren't a big club, but they're more medium than most

Unearthly · 15-01-2008 12:00AM

This is like the worldclass argument. Everyone has a different definition of what a big club is so it's silly to debate it.

15-01-2008 12:46AM

A big club is a club should be one that the likes of Sparta Prague or Anderlecht etc get excited about playing in a European game.....do Newcastle fall into that?

aidan24326 · 15-01-2008 12:47AM

Unearthly wrote: »

This is like the worldclass argument. Everyone has a different definition of what a big club is so it's silly to debate it.

True. It's a relative term. Really there's only 3 'big' clubs in England- Man Utd, Arsenal, Liverpool. Chelsea have only joined that grouping in recent times but they don't have the same history of success and are only 'johhny-come-latelys' at the top table thanks to Roman's rubles. (though hiring Glenn Hoddle as manager and subsequently attracting Gullit to the club is what really kicked things off for Chelsea).

After that you've got Tottenham, Villa, Man City, Everton and Newcastle in a second tier (Chelsea could really be included in this group also).

Like many other posters here I think Newcastle fans do have delusions of grandeur and the level of expectation makes the manager's job impossible as success is demanded instantly.

I also agree with the poster who said that they've been buying the wrong type of players. This needs to change. Take Mark Viduka. A good player no doubt, but he shows all the signs of being the type of player who's just cashing the paychecks at this stage, and big fat paychecks at that.

A big club is a club should be one that the likes of Sparta Prague or Anderlecht etc get excited about playing in a European game.....do Newcastle fall into that?

Good pont. Newcastle don't have any sort of history at all at that level. Even the likes of Everton and Villa would be more widely respected names on the continent.

therecklessone · 15-01-2008 01:07AM

astrofool wrote: »

Celtic are the bigger club than Rangers, more support, and european success, Rangers are on the cusp of it though. Even through Rangers 9 in a row, Celtic were the bigger club, and would have more power on european football matters (I don't particularly like Celtic myself).

]

Rangers' trophy haul:

51 League titles
31 Scottsh Cups
24 League Cups
1 Cup Winners Cup

Total - 107

Celtic's trophy haul:

41 League titles
34 Scottish Cups
13 League Cups
1 European Cup.

Total - 89

Their head to head record sees Rangers with 150 wins to Celtic's 135 out of a total of 377 meetings.

The most up to date Deloitte Football Money League puts Rangers in the top 20 but not Celtic link and Forbes puts Celtic's debt as % of value as much higher than Rangers link.

Celtic do beat them on attendances, mainly because they have a bigger stadium, though Rangers are examining options to extend Ibrox to a 70k capacity stadium IIRC.

As for fanbase, I suspect the two clubs enjoy similar levels of supports both in Scotland and abroad.

I couldn't give a fcuk about either club, but if you're gonna call one a big club you've gotta call the other.

astrofool wrote: »

Ajax are the big dutch team, it would take many years of PSV staying ahead and growing their fanbase to compete with them.

Lyon, I'll give you, but they're the only french club thats mattering these days, esp. at a european level. If they aren't a big club, then France has none Marseille would have been if it wasn't for what happened at the start of the last decade.

Hang on a second...despite being THE outstanding team in Dutch football since the turn of the century, they lag behind Ajax because of a smaller fanbase...yet Lyon, who's success is largely confined to the same period ARE a big club, despite their fanbase lagging behind at least Marseilles and PSG?

astrofool wrote: »

Anyway, on recent or past performances, Newcastle aren't a big club, but they're more medium than most

On that we are agreed...;)

homerjay2005 · 15-01-2008 01:19AM

theres loads of ways to define a big club. you can take it on success or also,things like fan base and general club stature. in my opinion,newcastle are a big club. Clubs that have a history,are big clubs too. But that is just my opinion.

Big clubs,in rough order,please dont confuse Chelseas stature over last 4 years with greatness, but there have a decent history,dispite what all the songs say:D -

United
Liverpool
Arsenal
Newcaslte
Everton
Chelsea

after that,hmmm,

Villa are a biggish club,Birmingham are not.
Spurs are a biggish club, West ham are not.
etc etc.

Celtic and Rangers are both big clubs. i dont see much difference between them.

Mr Alan · 15-01-2008 02:12AM

homerjay2005 wrote: »

in rough order
United
Liverpool

rough order is right!

switch those two around and ya might be onto something!

homerjay2005 · 15-01-2008 09:44AM

oh jaysus,here we go again!!!!!!

no,ill leave it as it is al....im sure there is something more topical and present to row over.

astrofool · 15-01-2008 01:19PM

Just on Celtic, Rangers, I actually had both in the original post, then thought about it and removed Rangers, despite the greater success in the past, they are not as big a club as Celtic at the moment, and on the European comment, most teams would be excited to play Celtic, but not Rangers.

However, if Rangers get their stadium sorted, and can start having more success in Europe, then there's no reason why they can't move up there.

Savman · 15-01-2008 03:17PM

Newcastle are not a big club, I can't believe it's even up for debate. It's not similar to the world class debate, this can actually be proven by simple facts that they haven't won enough silverware to be considered up there with the big boys.

So, toon boys, accept your mediocrity with the rest of us and get over it. You could be big one day, but so could anyone with the right stuff in place.

Top: ManU, Chelsea, Arse, Pool
Middle: ManC, Spurs, Villa, Newcastle, Everton
Perennial dark horses: Blackburn, Pompey, West Ham

I think that takes everything into consideration but nothing is set in stone, teams like Blackburn, West Ham and Pompey could very well be considered in that medium tier in years to come. It's also good to see City, Villa & Everton push the Top 4, it makes the premiership better as a competition and I think these are good times for the league itself, seems to be attracting a lot more top managers and players from abroad.

Brazilians in the premiership...they have what now?

Third_Echelon · 15-01-2008 03:19PM

homerjay2005 wrote: »

theres loads of ways to define a big club. you can take it on success or also,things like fan base and general club stature. in my opinion,newcastle are a big club. Clubs that have a history,are big clubs too. But that is just my opinion.

Big clubs,in rough order,please dont confuse Chelseas stature over last 4 years with greatness, but there have a decent history,dispite what all the songs say:D -

United
Liverpool
Arsenal
Newcaslte
Everton
Chelsea

after that,hmmm,

Villa are a biggish club,Birmingham are not.
Spurs are a biggish club, West ham are not.
etc etc.

Celtic and Rangers are both big clubs. i dont see much difference between them.

How can you have Everton below Newcastle?

Everton have had overall more success and have won 3 leagues, 2 FA cups and a European Cup Winners Cup since the last time Newcastle got their hands on silverware in 1969!!!!

The mind boggles :rolleyes:

Newcastle are not a big club. Having a big stadium filled with delusional muppets does not define a big club.

Success on the pitch is where it counts. End of...

Savman · 15-01-2008 03:24PM

Third_Echelon wrote: »

How can you have Everton below Newcastle?

homerjay2005 wrote:

in rough order,

homerjay2005 wrote:

after that,hmmm,

Villa are a biggish club

'scuse me, if we're gonna get nit picky then I demand inclusion in that list :eek:
biggish dickish

Third_Echelon · 15-01-2008 03:31PM

Savman wrote: »

'scuse me, if we're gonna get nit picky then I demand inclusion in that list :eek:
biggish dickish

very rough order it seems..

dc69 · 15-01-2008 03:57PM

Savman wrote: »

Newcastle are not a big club, I can't believe it's even up for debate. It's not similar to the world class debate, this can actually be proven by simple facts that they haven't won enough silverware to be considered up there with the big boys.

So, toon boys, accept your mediocrity with the rest of us and get over it. You could be big one day, but so could anyone with the right stuff in place.

Top: ManU, Chelsea, Arse, Pool
Middle: ManC, Spurs, Villa, Newcastle, Everton
Perennial dark horses: Blackburn, Pompey, West Ham

I think that takes everything into consideration but nothing is set in stone, teams like Blackburn, West Ham and Pompey could very well be considered in that medium tier in years to come. It's also good to see City, Villa & Everton push the Top 4, it makes the premiership better as a competition and I think these are good times for the league itself, seems to be attracting a lot more top managers and players from abroad.

Brazilians in the premiership...they have what now?

how are liverpool 4th in your list of the top 4 and cheski,arse ahead of them,thats idiotic imo whatever about united i will say nothing but whoever is first,chlelski arent a big club as they have no history and should be with the likes of everton etc and arsenal arent as succesfull as the other 2

homerjay2005 · 15-01-2008 04:07PM

lads, success does not mean a big club. celtic and rangers are on a par,current standings does not mean anything. in my opinion,is down to stature and fan base and overall club size,not honours. newcastle can still fill a ground despite not winning anything remotely major in 50 years. in my opinion, thats a big club.

sav,I rate villa as a big club,dont get me wrong....but clearly others on here wont.

success does not mean a big club. Monaco and a few others like leverkusen have had reasonable success lately, but are still not "big".

you need a history to be a big club, thats why i had chelsea towards the bottom of the list. they are now a big club,a reallybig club,a big turnover,but thats about it for me.

Savman · 15-01-2008 04:52PM

dc69 wrote: »

how are liverpool 4th in your list of the top 4 and cheski,arse ahead of them,thats idiotic imo whatever about united i will say nothing but whoever is first,chlelski arent a big club as they have no history and should be with the likes of everton etc and arsenal arent as succesfull as the other 2

Eh? Most incoherent babble I've read in a while.
I didn't post any "rankings", it was simply a list of what is now being called the "Top 4" in England, whatever order.
Chelsea aren't a big club....riiiiight. Have you been watching any football the last few years? There was this guy called Jose...in 3yrs at Chelsea he won the Premiership twice :eek:, League Cup twice and FA cup once. He even threw in a community shield for good measure.

I dunno, that's kind of big.

astrofool · 15-01-2008 04:54PM

dc69 wrote: »

how are liverpool 4th in your list of the top 4 and cheski,arse ahead of them,thats idiotic imo whatever about united i will say nothing but whoever is first,chlelski arent a big club as they have no history and should be with the likes of everton etc and arsenal arent as succesfull as the other 2

I don't think he has them in any order, just in groups? How twisted are those knickers?

Theboinkmaster · 15-01-2008 05:18PM

Depends how you judge 'big' - trophies, fanbase, revenues etc but Newcastle are nowhere near it and seem to have constant delusions of grandeur, changing their manager so often does not help obviously.

IMHO the big clubs from the PL are all in the CL, with quite a few putting pressure on the big 4 which is great to see.

And Mr Alan Man Utd are currently the 'biggest' club in England without question - current champions, current leaders, largest global fanbase, doubled profits last financial year, largest revenues (I think) and a fantastic & successful history

BaZmO* · 15-01-2008 05:29PM

If you look at the International Teams you could say that America are a big team because of the size of their country but they're not because they've never won anything.

As Theboinkmaster said, when it comes to big clubs, look no further than the Champions League, that's where the elite of the modern game play, i.e. Big Clubs.

If you want to break it down further into history, support, size of ground by all means do but it certainly doesn't take away from the fact that a team hasn't won anything in the last 20 years.

One Cold Hand · 15-01-2008 06:05PM

homerjay2005 wrote: »

theres loads of ways to define a big club. you can take it on success or also,things like fan base and general club stature. in my opinion,newcastle are a big club. Clubs that have a history,are big clubs too. But that is just my opinion.

Big clubs,in rough order,please dont confuse Chelseas stature over last 4 years with greatness, but there have a decent history,dispite what all the songs say:D -

United
Liverpool
Arsenal
Newcaslte
Everton
Chelsea

after that,hmmm,

Villa are a biggish club,Birmingham are not.
Spurs are a biggish club, West ham are not.
etc etc.

Celtic and Rangers are both big clubs. i dont see much difference between them.

Jeez that is rough.
Dunno how Newcastle are ahead of Everton, Chelsea, Villa or Spurs!!
Chelsea have won nearly more trophies in the last 3 years than Newcastle ever have (probably a slight exageration!). Villa have twice the amount of trophies that Newcastle have, including a European Cup.
Is that based purely on attendances?

One Cold Hand · 15-01-2008 07:04PM

Okay, I've taken the time break this down into categories. (This was surprisingly therapeutic!)
(also I've only really looked at the big 4, plus Everton, Newcastle, Villa, Spurs. It could be argued that other should be in there)

Success during the premiership years:
Man U
Arsenal
Chelsea/L'pool

Everton
Villa (The order of these 4 are fairly debateable)
Blackburn
Spurs

Then theres a whole host of teams:
Leeds (didn't win anything much, but got into the Champions League)
Leicester (Lge cup and lge cup final in 97, 99 and 00)
Middleborough (Lge Cup 2004)
Newcastle (Nothing!)

Overall History (Taken from the list in an earlier post)
L'pool
Man U
Arsenal
Villa
Spurs
Everton
Chelsea
Newcastle

Even this is fairly debatable, as it depends on what trophies you put most value on. For example the majority of Spurs trophies are FA Cups, whereas the majority of Evertons and Leagues.

Attendances (This season)
Man U (75k)
Arsenal (60k)
Newcastle (50k)
L'Pool (43k)
Sunderland(!) (42k)
Man City (42k)
Chelsea (41k)
Villa (39k)
Everton (36k)
Spurs (35k)

Again this is slightly flawed as a lot of it depends on the stadium size and fan base.

Fan Base
Not really sure how to list this, so my analysis is as follows:
Newcastle - pop 260,000. Teams 1
London - pop 7,500,000. Teams 5
Birmingham - pop 2,200,000. Teams 2
Manchester - pop 2,200,000. Teams 2
Liverpool - 900,000. Teams 2

So it would seem that Newcastle has a lot smaller fan base than the London teams (and any of the other teams for that matter), although obviously there's a lot of other teams in London outside the premiership (example Charlton) that would have quite large fan bases.
Obviously that means that for a city population of 260,000, a weekly attendance ave of 50k is quite good.

So after all of that what have I decided? Nothing much really!! Just a sh1t load of useless info!! But here's my overall list...
1st and 2nd: Man U / L'pool
3rd Arse
4th Chelsea
5th Villa (I'm slightly biased!)
6th Everton
7th Spurs

Somewhere else: Newcastle

Savman · 15-01-2008 07:08PM

zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz

:D:D

Good shtuff OCH, or shud we call you Stato

kinaldo · 15-01-2008 07:21PM

One Cold Hand wrote:

Then theres a whole host of teams:
Leeds (didn't win anything much, but got into the Champions League)
Newcastle (Nothing!)

Fan Base
Not really sure how to list this, so my analysis is as follows:
Newcastle - pop 260,000. Teams 1
London - pop 7,500,000. Teams 5
Birmingham - pop 2,200,000. Teams 2
Manchester - pop 2,200,000. Teams 2
Liverpool - 900,000. Teams 2

Not sure what you're getting at here. London has 13 league teams. And how come Newcastle don't get kudos for qualifying for the Champions League? And not getting relegated!

Theboinkmaster · 15-01-2008 07:25PM

One Cold Hand wrote: »

Okay, I've taken the time break this down into categories. (This was surprisingly therapeutic!)
(also I've only really looked at the big 4, plus Everton, Newcastle, Villa, Spurs. It could be argued that other should be in there)

Success during the premiership years:
Man U
Arsenal
Chelsea/L'pool

Everton
Villa (The order of these 4 are fairly debateable)
Blackburn
Spurs

Then theres a whole host of teams:
Leeds (didn't win anything much, but got into the Champions League)
Leicester (Lge cup and lge cup final in 97, 99 and 00)
Middleborough (Lge Cup 2004)
Newcastle (Nothing!)

Overall History (Taken from the list in an earlier post)
L'pool
Man U
Arsenal
Villa
Spurs
Everton
Chelsea
Newcastle

Even this is fairly debatable, as it depends on what trophies you put most value on. For example the majority of Spurs trophies are FA Cups, whereas the majority of Evertons and Leagues.

Attendances (This season)
Man U (75k)
Arsenal (60k)
Newcastle (50k)
L'Pool (43k)
Sunderland(!) (42k)
Man City (42k)
Chelsea (41k)
Villa (39k)
Everton (36k)
Spurs (35k)

Again this is slightly flawed as a lot of it depends on the stadium size and fan base.

Fan Base
Not really sure how to list this, so my analysis is as follows:
Newcastle - pop 260,000. Teams 1
London - pop 7,500,000. Teams 5
Birmingham - pop 2,200,000. Teams 2
Manchester - pop 2,200,000. Teams 2
Liverpool - 900,000. Teams 2

So it would seem that Newcastle has a lot smaller fan base than the London teams (and any of the other teams for that matter), although obviously there's a lot of other teams in London outside the premiership (example Charlton) that would have quite large fan bases.
Obviously that means that for a city population of 260,000, a weekly attendance ave of 50k is quite good.

So after all of that what have I decided? Nothing much really!! Just a sh1t load of useless info!! But here's my overall list...
1st and 2nd: Man U / L'pool
3rd Arse
4th Chelsea
5th Villa (I'm slightly biased!)
6th Everton
7th Spurs

Somewhere else: Newcastle

What about global fan base and revenues? list is meaningless IMHO due to the subjectivity of 'big'

15-01-2008 07:27PM

One Cold Hand wrote: »

Success during the premiership years:
Man U
Arsenal
Chelsea/L'pool

Everton
Villa (The order of these 4 are fairly debateable)
Blackburn
Spurs

Then theres a whole host of teams:
Leeds (didn't win anything much, but got into the Champions League)
Leicester (Lge cup and lge cup final in 97, 99 and 00)
Middleborough (Lge Cup 2004)
Newcastle (Nothing!)

Why is it people constantly forget that Blackburn actually won the Premiership? if you break it down in just this catagory alone then it goes like this:

Man U
Arsenal
Chelsea
Blackburn

Then:
Liverpool
Spurs
Villa
Everton
Newcastle

15-01-2008 07:28PM

Mr Alan wrote: »

rough order is right!

switch those two around and ya might be onto something!

Of all of the fans on this site who are obsessed with another club that they dont support u take the cake!!

I am somewhat obsessed with newcy tho, cos I went to skool with 3 Newcastle fans and listenin to them got Newcastle the nickname of Real Madrid in our school. Delusional.

Savman · 15-01-2008 07:39PM

Newcastle? A big club?
Everyone: Oh no you're not!
Newcastle fans: Oh yes we are!
Everyone: Oh no you're not!
Newcastle fans: Oh yes we are!
Everyone: Oh no you're not!
Newcastle fans: Oh yes we are!
Everyone: Oh no you're not!
Newcastle fans: Oh yes we are!

[and repeat to infinity and beyond]

Newcastle a big club ?

Comments