Number of players in current squad that won the world cup must be the dumbest possible factor to consider.
List of the 30 biggest clubs (by France Football)
- Thread starter Trizy
- Start date
-
In the latest episode of the United Hour Podcast, Nik @Rood and Imran @Annihilate Now! start with the good news by celebrating Manchester United Women's emphatic FA Cup win over Spurs at Wembley and the future of manager Marc Skinner.
Then it's the bad news and the ever worsening form of our Men with losses to Arsenal and Palace.
Finally the main debate - ETH Out now or keep him until the end of the season - if not longer. Are you Team Nik or Team Imran?
Hard to argue with this list also, if it's based on mythology behind the clubs. I'd put us above Liverpool though, naturally.
Al Ahly the african club of the century is num 22, wow great for my local club.
The thing about PSG is that the financial factors totally skew their ranking, they have no business being above OM if you ignore the money side, while a club like Porto could be in the list if it wasn't for relatively modest finances. The list isn't perfect but it's close to reality.
Not really, World Cup winners tend to be brilliant and play for the best teams. They're not rocking up in League 1.
Number of players to have won a WC
Also weird that they haven’t counted domestic titles.
I also have a hard time seeing an Egyptian club as the 22nd largest club in the world. Oh, and Juventus probably should be fourth.
Also weird that they haven’t counted domestic titles.
I also have a hard time seeing an Egyptian club as the 22nd largest club in the world. Oh, and Juventus probably should be fourth.
I guess you are right but I bet you can find a decent way to incorporate it, surely much better stat than "Number of players in current squad to have won a World Cup".
Well yeah, but how does that prove how big the club is. Vissel Kobe has 3.
Well World Cup winners tend to play for the best teams and are technically the best players in the world so it's a good barometer to see how good the rest of your team is if they're sticking around. On paper anyway.
Lists like these are always so difficult to agree with.
Perhaps it only takes into account current World Cup winners?
Isn't this one largely agreeable with the top 10 at least? Any position after that is a pointless discussion.
Best African club with record of 8 african C.L. And a tremendous fan base.Number of players to have won a WC
Also weird that they haven’t counted domestic titles.
I also have a hard time seeing an Egyptian club as the 22nd largest club in the world. Oh, and Juventus probably should be fourth.
Maybe Juventus and Milan further up - and what no Porto!??
Oh you silly French.
- 'number of players currently playing in Paris' category seems a bit of a stretch.
Good list but flawed too. There is simply no way Man City are the 9th biggest club in the world. Half the world didn’t know they existed ten years ago.
PSG had 2 titles before being taken over. They were never a factor and never much of a big club. Of course they weren't founded 10 years ago but you know what I meant.
Three French teams? Come on.
The transfer spending criteria pushed them way above their station as per.
Yep, the absolute definition of them.
I don't know what you mean because PSG were one of the better clubs in Europe in the 90s. French football has always been competitive the club with the most league titles is ASSE with 10, you talked about Monaco they are third with 8.
Well they certainly do now
With the explosion of social media and immense media coverage experienced over the last 10 years
When you make a list where PSG and City rank above AC Milan, the 2nd most successful club in European history which produced legendary players before PSG was even founded, it should be indicator enough that you picked the wrong criteria.
What next? Here the list of the biggest scientists:
1. Elon Musk
...
...
...
7862. Newton
Ordered by wealth, TV appearances and Twitter followers.
What next? Here the list of the biggest scientists:
1. Elon Musk
...
...
...
7862. Newton
Ordered by wealth, TV appearances and Twitter followers.
Yes they do now. But in my opinion pumping billions of dodgy money, manipulating revenue and a few trophies doesn’t make you bigger than the Milan clubs for example. But yeah if we’re talking about a club to define the social media generation of fans, let City and PSG battle it out
City can’t even sell out their own stadium for God’s sake
Newton was wrong about sooo much and only had a pretty basic grasp of the little he got right, and hasn't been relevant for at least like 15 years. Plus he doesn't even have a Nobel prize. And besides, there wasn't really much competition in terms of being a scientist back then.
How long can someone live on their past glory?
They've used the Fenerbache badge to represent Galatasaray there.
Overall, I think the list is pretty accurate, albeit for a few shock surprises such as Budapest Honved FC, Belgrade and NYC.
Overall, I think the list is pretty accurate, albeit for a few shock surprises such as Budapest Honved FC, Belgrade and NYC.
Do you think the modern achievers in anything could have done it to their extent without the progress of predecessors? There’ll be a time when people are doing things that make our advances seem moderate. Your argument comparing scientists from utterly different times is a bit stupid. Unless you’re joking of course - I did check twice for white text!
I was hoping there would be enough giveaways without any white text
No Spurs on the list, so it's invalid by default.
Seems like a reasonable attempt to balance historical factors with the current situation.
Perhaps, if instead of the 'World Cup winners in squad', criteria they could have had a broader category around 'top' players in squad. I know the Guardian does a top 100, does a French journal? Still arbitrary but would reflect a club's attractiveness and ability to develop players.
Perhaps, if instead of the 'World Cup winners in squad', criteria they could have had a broader category around 'top' players in squad. I know the Guardian does a top 100, does a French journal? Still arbitrary but would reflect a club's attractiveness and ability to develop players.
The obviously forgot to factor in number of Cheese Rooms available.
Nothing wrong with that. They also have a 'European Cup (UCL) winners in the squad'. Fact is, those two are the biggest competitions in national and club football, so it makes sense to have that category.
Obviously, there will always be debate about the criterias used. From Juventus fan point of view, it seems a little arbitrary that they seem to use a lot of historical data with regard to trophies won, but for world cup winners only those still active count, while domestic trophies do not count at all. That certainly costs us points. While 6th place is fine for us (we probably should not be higher than 5th), the gap to those in front of us seems a bit excessive.
Generally, the top 6 are fine. Behind that it seems a little skewed towards modern-rich teams instead of (past) success. Personally, I think Milan and Inter are bigger teams than Arsenal or Tottenham who may be richer and more popular, but haven't won a European Cup/Champions League ever and haven't won the league in ages. But based on financial and popularity metrics, they come out on top. Obviously it depends on preference
Generally, the top 6 are fine. Behind that it seems a little skewed towards modern-rich teams instead of (past) success. Personally, I think Milan and Inter are bigger teams than Arsenal or Tottenham who may be richer and more popular, but haven't won a European Cup/Champions League ever and haven't won the league in ages. But based on financial and popularity metrics, they come out on top. Obviously it depends on preference
Is it CL winners in the squad or number of CL wins of the Club? I was under the Impression it was the latter, but may be mistaken.
You're actually right.
The biggest elephant in the room on that list is that in French, The Netherlands (or well Holland) is actually called Pays-Bas. So yeah, feck French.
This might be a bit controversial, but are Barca really as big as people make them out to be? I mean they are undoubtedly a massive club but the 2nd biggest club in the world? A lot of this overrating is because of the "Messi factor". Before the Ronaldinho/Messi era they had 16 league titles (comfortably behind Madrid's 29 in 2004) and 1 UCL. Before the last 15 years, they had only truly one great team in the modern era, the Dream team of the early 90s and while players like Cryuff, Maradona and Ronaldo played for Barcelona, their careers aren't really defined by Barca in the same way as those of Messi, Ronaldinho, Iniesta or Xavi's are. They have always had this romanticism attached with them as the symbol of Catalan independence against the oppression of Madrid but in footballing terms, before this last 15 year period I don't think they could be considered at the same level as Real Madrid. Even now, living in Barcelona, it is quite evident how big a chip they have on their shoulders regarding beating Real. Every Barca fan I've met wants to one up Real,every title is a big feck you directed towards Madrid, but in general Real fans aren't much bothered by Barca as long as they are winning themselves.
Growing up in Asia, the biggest club was always Man Utd followed by Real Madrid and Liverpool. In Latin and South America, by all accounts the biggest club is Real Madrid. So this notion of Barca as the 2nd biggest club in the world seems a lot to do with the last decade or so and the Messi factor rather than the representation of their historical standing within the game.
Growing up in Asia, the biggest club was always Man Utd followed by Real Madrid and Liverpool. In Latin and South America, by all accounts the biggest club is Real Madrid. So this notion of Barca as the 2nd biggest club in the world seems a lot to do with the last decade or so and the Messi factor rather than the representation of their historical standing within the game.
No, too arbitratry for me. In theory City could have scored higher than Barcelona or Juventus because Mendy is one squad and Portugal and Argentina have not won the world cup ever/recently. I think having Messi or Ronaldo in your team enhances the 'size' of a club as opposed to world cup winning Mendy. Agree to disagree though.
Yeah, you're probably right. I guess some better criteria might have chosen, like the number of active players who have ever finished in top 5 - top 10 of Ballon D'Or voting.