Yes - that's a fair point: things do change (always), the landscape changes and the PL seems to just further cement its status as the biggest league in the world in terms of commercial appeal, with more teams joining an "elite" group at the top: however, I'd still say that the basic challenge for any team seeking to avoid becoming irrelevant is to remain - precisely - part of said group (whether that group comprises four teams - or seven).
In a future scenario where six or seven teams have the resources (financial and otherwise) to genuinely challenge for the biggest prizes, finishing below the top four won't have the same implications. By which I mean, it wouldn't necessarily spell disaster from either a commercial or a football perspective (the ability to attract sponsors - and players).
For the presumed top teams (based on wealth and potential in general) in most leagues, finishing anywhere from 3rd and below is considered failure at the moment. In a scenario where you're actually looking at seven "top teams", this would necessarily change - as in, the perception of both fans and potential sponsors would have to change with regard to what is considered unacceptable.
Agree with all of that but my original point was different; I was quoting someone else's post.
I was trying to allude to the fact that United (and Liverpool) could afford to be mediocre for several years and yet remain the top dog in the country in every sense, like commercial deals, press-coverage, annual revenue, social media following, global popularity, players' club of choice, etc. However, times have changed. I always like to give the example of Arsenal and Spurs. Arsenal have won so much, and have produced some of the greatest moments in English football - 13 league titles, 14 FA Cups, the Invincibles, and so forth. They are a true behemoth of English football, bettered by only two other clubs in the land. But that is history. History.
Sadly, in today's context, they are not much better than Spurs in every aspect of the game. For those of us living outside London, the two clubs almost feel like two similarly-sized football clubs today. That's such a shame. Spurs haven't won any meaningful trophy since the time of Margaret Thatcher! Spurs have won a sum total of 2 League trophies, the last one was in 1960! Forget the League, they haven't even won a meaningful domestic Cup for 30-odd years. But in today's context, the two clubs appear and feel similar - two
biggish second-tier clubs from London with similar teams, similar global appeal, similar revenues, similar players' preferences, with a similar chance of finishing in the top-four this season, or winning a domestic Cup.
Well, Arsenal maybe a tad bigger still, but that is not my main point. Arsenal ceded their vast superiority that spanned across several decades, earned by several wonderful players, in a mere matter of 10-years of mediocrity.