Yeah there is. Are you really saying that Manchester united are not a bigger club than Scunthorpe because there is no such thing? <whereistheflan?>
Its not all of them is it, releasing Seb and Daws is hardly all of them, without them we still have 5 players for the CB positions, thats why.
So are we talking success? That would make Blackburn bigger than you, having won the league more times than you in the last 30-40 years. Fan base? Sunderland and Newcastle are bigger than you. What I'm saying is football clubs change so fast these days that bigger and smaller is only a matter of time, and can change within a couple of years. Look at man city, Norwich, Southampton, qpr, wolves, Leeds, Sheffield utd etc. Whose bigger than who? Hurry up with your answer because it could change within 2 years. Where would spurs be now had Harry not managed to save you a couple of years ago? How many fans would you have in the championship or league 1? Who knows..... Good luck for the season by the way, hope you're as enjoyable to watch as you were last year.
Sunderland and Newcastle have bigger grounds. Fan base, debatable. At a guess I would say the spurs fan base is bigger than sunderlands.
Slightly off course, but on the mention of grounds, what's happening on the new stadium? It was in the news loads last year but there's nothing now. Is it all a case of paperwork and behind the scenes stuff before building starts?
Agree with that Don't agree with that. Arsenal have improved since the 10/11 season and look to be signing decent players. Cazorla is as good as any signing they've made in recent years. If you look at Spurs you have looked nowhere near as good as you did in the 09/10 season where you looked like world beaters from about April onwards. I think people are underestimating them. They impressed me far more than any of the other big 4 teams so far
I think Arsenal are, or can be, a good side. I agree about Cazorla - looks to be a class act. However, at the moment, neither Giroud nor Podolski look like being an adequate substitute for RVP. And, I think they will regret selling Song, also. If they can get Wilshere back, keep him fit, and keep the brain dead little oik out of jail, they could still be up there.
Assuming Dawson does move on, that still leaves us with 4 international centre-halves. I'd still like to see some versatile cover brought in at the back, though.
On success, we've been more successful overall than Blackburn in the last 30/40 years having won more trophies and amassed more top flight points. Same as for Sunderland and Toon. So on the success front we are bigger than Rovers Toon and Sunderalnd, since let's say 1980 for a starting point, but you can go back earlier if you like. We have a far bigger fanbase tthan Rovers or Sunderland, and a larger one than Toon. http://www.talksport.co.uk/magazine...d-liverpool-arsenal-barca-real-or-chelsea?p=1 Almost double the fans of Toon, Sunderland and Rovers don't register So we're bigger clubs than all three in that respect too. Basically we are a bigger club than Rovers, Toon and Sunderland, in terms of trophies won and in terms of global and domestic support. Relevant points tables http://www.statto.com/football/stats/england/premier-league/all-time-table/pl-years Bit of a surprise and disappoint for Sunderland I'm sure to be behind Fulham All-time table Sunderland do better there, but all three still behind Spurs http://www.statto.com/football/stats/england/premier-league/all-time-table/full all-time trophy table http://www.krysstal.com/trophies.html Again Spurs head all three, Sunderland behind Rovers, a bit of a surprise that, still Rovers have actually won a couple of trophies since 1973, Sunderland's last time they disturbed the trophy cabinet. Current UEFA rankings http://kassiesa.home.xs4all.nl/bert/uefa/data/method4/trank2012.html Another clean sweep for Spurs - the other three teams way behind our 27th, Rovers at 99th and, AFAICS Toon and Sunderland are nowhere in the top 100, residing in the also rans alongside Gillingham, Charlton, whoever. All time Club rankings http://www.clubworldrankings.com/100.htm Spurs 40 th - way in fron of the other three thhis time Rovers and Sunderland don't even trouble the Top 100, Too lagging way behind at 90th Conclusion Spurs are bigger than Rovers, Toon or Sunderland More fan support tables twitter http://blog.freestyleinteractive.co...ague-football-clubs-on-twitter-in-2012-stats/ Spurs over double Toon, Sunderland Rovers not on table, so below us Can't find the Facebook stats for the other clubs but here's ours https://www.tottenhamhotspur.com/spurs/News/latest-news.page? note we now have 234k on Twitter - up from the blog figure I've no doubt both our FB and Titter figures are bigger than all three other clubs. Oh and one last thing Income - a key test of club size last season http://www.telegraph.co.uk/sport/fo...l-health-of-the-Premier-League-laid-bare.html Again an easy win for Spurs - almost double their nearest rival Toon. Now as victories go - that's massively comprehensive I'd say Spurs win by a country mile
In reality though teams are judged by how many league titles and European Cups they've won. In which I'm Afraid to say both Newcastle and Sunderland trump you in that aspect. I think it's fair to say Spurs are bigger clubs than Sunderland (Just) and Blackburn (By a long long way) but not in a million years are you bigger than Newcastle. IMO
I said better in the quote of mine you're referring to. QPR and Stoke are both bottom half teams, I think Dawson and Huddlestone are good enough to play for sides in the top half. Whether my team stuggled at the start of one season is irrelevant because I was talking about QPR. You went for the petty dig which had nothing to do with anything so don't pretend you had a point, you were just scorned at your club being considered not good enough for a player of Dawson's quality.
Some believe they are. I don't agree with it but that's pretty much the reality. There is no way Villa are a bigger club than Chelsea or Spurs. Or Forest a bigger club than Spurs
So you don't agree with your own claim, then? Villa's 6 prehistoric titles, plus one modern one and the European Cup would put them ahead of Chelsea's recent acquisitions. The tallies are 8 to 5, so by your own standard, they're well ahead.
I didn't make that claim I just said "the reality is" as in consensus. That's certainly how the media view it anyway
But they don't. They certainly don't view Liverpool and Villa as more important sides than Man Utd and Chelsea respectively, do they? True. Maybe just another young centre-half, then? I guess Fryers would fill that role, if he doesn't go elsewhere, as is being reported.
Trophy count is but one criterion in looking at size, a key one though. I've given a range of criteria re Toon, Sunderland, and Rovers and it's quite obvious than Spurs are bigger than any of those clubs A criterion I would add is that I rate more recent trophies higher than say 19th century trophies, a Villa speciality. As far as using that criterion Spurs again have the edge - Toon barren since 69, oo er missus , sundrland 73, Rovers 2002, us 2008, also trophies won within last 30 years which is what Sunderland fan mentioned Spurs 4, Rovers 2, Toon 0 Sunderland 0 Within 40 years, also mentioned by oppo fan Spurs 7, Rovers 2, SAFC 1, NUFC 0 Another easy, easy victory for Spurs
If I was to rank clubs in size I would go Utd, Pool, Arsenal, Chelsea, Spurs, City But after this season I think I'll be ranking City higher than us, and if people said they were already bigger than us I wouldn't put up much of an argument. The enormous achievements and huge fanbase of Pool over the past 50 years for me means it'll take a while for Chelsea or City to overtake them. I'd say they're closing in fairly rapidly on Arsenal though.
