The Student Room Group

Can a club be big without having a Champions League/European Cup trophy to your name?

Look at Arsenal, Tottenham, Man City... none of them have won the CL yet their fans they tehy're a big club, which they obviously aren't.

I just feel that you can't be a big club and have no European Cups at the same time.

Scroll to see replies

That just shows why Arsene Wenger is the greatest manager in the history of football.

To have achieved the trophies he has done and get 16 consecutive years of Champions League football at a small club is an incredible achievement, he has left big clubs like Forest and Villa chasing shadows.
I think the size of a club depends on their current situation. Does anyone really think that Aston Villa or Nottingham Forest are bigger clubs than the ones you mentioned? Or Steaua Bucharest, for that matter. They have historical relevance. They aren't big clubs, and 'big clubs' don't need European titles to be big.

It helps, of course. But it isn't essential.
Let me get the popcorn. Thread will have peaked by tomorrow morning.
Original post by russellsteapot
I think the size of a club depends on their current situation. Does anyone really think that Aston Villa or Nottingham Forest are bigger clubs than the ones you mentioned?


Their fans probably....
Reply 5
Would you call West Ham a big club, we're actually quite reletively known around Europe to many football fans and are seen as a likeable club to, though if you count UEFA Cup a cup then yeah we have got a cup lol
It's a combination of current domestic success as well as European success. Historical aspects help to create the overall image of a 'big' club but I would argue that it is not totally essential.
So the only criteria for being a big club is winning a cup competition? :rolleyes:

I hate the notion of "big" clubs. What does it mean? Nothing. It's usually something brought up by fans whose club was once good but are now struggling. They fall back on the past. I only care what a club is doing now.
Arsenal definitely are but there's no excuse for them to not have won a European Cup. Any argument about it being easier to win in it's original format just makes them look even worse. They've been in it every year since the re brand and only got close once.

Oh and Villa are obviously bigger than Tottenham ffs.

Original post by russellsteapot
I think the size of a club depends on their current situation. Does anyone really think that Aston Villa or Nottingham Forest are bigger clubs than the ones you mentioned?


Depends if you think football started in 1993/2004 or not. Everton, Tottenham and Arsenal will always be bigger than the likes of Chelsea and Man. City. No chance the club with the 4th highest major honours total isn't a big club. Forest are different in that they had a brief spell of success, we've won trophies in the 50's, 60's, 70's, 80's and 90's and are English football's originals. Granted we are punching well below our weight now.
Of course, Arsenal FC are an example. Only Utd, Real, Barca, Milan and Bayern are bigger when you consider the mix of titles, long term financial position, size of fanbase, stadium etc.

Moreover, winning the CL does not necessary make you a big club. Consider Chelsea, a club that wouldnt even be in the CL without a sugar daddy and one which surely will eventually return to the wilderness when Roman ****s off.
(edited 9 years ago)
Original post by Zürich
Of course, Arsenal FC are an example. Only Utd, Real, Barca, Milan and Bayern are bigger when you consider the mix of titles, long term financial position, size of fanbase, stadium etc.

Moreover, winning the CL does not necessary make you a big club. Consider Chelsea, a club that wouldnt even be in the CL without a sugar daddy and one which surely will eventually return to the wilderness when Roman ****s off.


Liverpool
Juventus
Arsenal is not a big club?

Are you out of your mind?
Original post by manchesterunited15
Liverpool
Juventus


Those were the first two that came into my head, along with Benfica, Inter and Ajax.
Original post by Wilfred Little
Those were the first two that came into my head, along with Benfica, Inter and Ajax.


Maybe even Dortmund?

What else can you expect from Zurich though
Original post by manchesterunited15
Maybe even Dortmund?

What else can you expect from Zurich though


A strong case can definitely be made.

When the G14 was made, Arsenal were not in that original group which speaks for itself. Plus they don't have the excuse of them playing in a smaller, less followed league like Benfica do.

Porto: 27 leagues, 2 European cups?
Original post by Wilfred Little
A strong case can definitely be made.

When the G14 was made, Arsenal were not in that original group which speaks for itself. Plus they don't have the excuse of them playing in a smaller, less followed league like Benfica do.

Porto: 27 leagues, 2 European cups?


Hard to say, twice Arsenal's league titles but it is in Portugal... I'd lean towards yes
Original post by manchesterunited15
Maybe even Dortmund?

What else can you expect from Zurich though


What exactly is your metric?

My metric is that we have millions more fans than Dortmund/Ajax/Porto/Benfica, can afford to blow them out of the water in the transfer-market, compete in a far superior league etc.
Original post by manchesterunited15
Hard to say, twice Arsenal's league titles but it is in Portugal... I'd lean towards yes


Of course you would!
Original post by Zürich
What exactly is your metric?

My metric is that we have millions more fans than Dortmund/Ajax/Porto/Benfica, can afford to blow them out of the water in the transfer-market, compete in a far superior league etc.


You might have more fans worldwide but Dortmund have the highest average attendance in the world. You have the money to blow them out the water but you don't, money sitting in the bank does not make a club bigger. They've all won the european cup, all except dortmund have more league titles, and that's just because Dortmund have Bayern to compete with.
Original post by Zürich
Of course you would!


I'm definitely the biased one in this discussion lel

Quick Reply

Latest