How to measure a "big" Football Club

Why is there 7 English clubs on the list?

Because of the Premiership and its TV rights which are sold worldwide on a revenue sharing principle among the clubs, which in turn gives many of the clubs in the league a good source of revenue they wouldn't otherwise have. That has nothing to do with how 'big' individual clubs are, but more with how the Premier League has managed to position itself in the global sporting market.

Attendances at the games only account for small portions of clubs' revenues. The big money is in the TV rights, and that's where the Premier League is miles ahead of other leagues. And that's why so many people here seem to think that half the Premiership are among the biggest clubs in the world, where in reality few would have even heard of many of them just 15-20 years ago.

But that's exactly my point - Newcastle aren't that well known, they're just piggybacking off the Premier League bandwagon and enjoying the money without doing anything themselves. Take the TV money away, and see where they end up.

That doesn't make them a big club - a big club doesn't depend on its surroundings, a big club is just a big club. What makes a big club in world terms is a conglomeration of factors (history/trophies/youth systems/production and attraction of quality players/impact on community/impact on national level/impact on global level/fan-base at home and abroad/brand recognisability/financial soundness) and in global terms, Newcastle falls on quite a few of these.

Remembering Newcastle are only in a slight "hole" and that Perennial strugglers Perennial strugglers Liverpool would also fall on a few of your criteria.

I still maintain that most NZers are likely to know who Newcastle is over say, Bayern Munich or Villareal...

I do understand your point though.

My post on the other thread at the request of EG:The clubs revenue has come through their exposure (thanks to the Premier
League) and I don't think a club could be truly big without these two
things (revenue + exposure).� So if there is a high revenue then there's
almost certainly reasonable (at least) exposure, yes?� So you could
still not unreasonably say that you can tell the club is big by it's
revenue.

This seems to be down to personal definitions.� Why can a team not be big even if they're only piggybacking off the Premier League bandwagon?� In my eyes, yes the Premier League has done huge things for these clubs and without it they would be far from what they currently are, but they're still big.A team could have all of what you listed ("history/trophies/youth systems/production and attraction of quality
players/impact on community/impact on national level/impact on global
level/fan-base at home and abroad/brand recognisability/financial
soundness") but still only be a product of the Premier League.� And they'd still be big despite the massive debt they owed the league they were in.

Perhaps we should compile a "Biggest club list"

I'll start.

1. Manchester United
2. Real Madrid

I'll everyone else to it!

Barcelona
Perennial strugglers Perennial strugglers Liverpool
Inter Milan
AC Milan
Juventus
Bayern Munich
Boca Juniors
River Plate
ACFC

Contentious:
Arsenal
Chelsea
Sao Paulo
Ajax

Young Boys Berne

Funny how Scottish football has gone so far down the gurgler, in the 60s and early 70s Celtic were probably up there with the biggest/most famous clubs in the World. My old man took me to see them play Leeds in the European Cup semi-final at Hampden. 120,000 people there. Look at them now. Shame.   

Here we go. Tried to rank them, but that's pretty hard, and I'm not overly happy with how I've done it, but meh.

1. Real Madrid
2. Perennial strugglers Liverpool
3. AC Milan
4. Manchester United
5. Barcelona
6. Bayern
7. Juventus
8. Ajax
9. Internazionale
10. Benfica
11. River Plate
12. Boca Juniors
13. Flamengo
14. Independiente
15. Sao Paulo
16. Porto
17. Penarol
18. Celtic
19. Feyenoord
20. Newcastle United!!! (no, not really) Corinthians

Here we go. Tried to rank them, but that's pretty hard, and I'm not overly happy with how I've done it, but meh.

1. Real Madrid
2. Liverpo0l
3. AC Milan
4. Manchester United
5. Barcelona
6. Bayern
7. Juventus
8. Ajax
9. Internazionale
10. Benfica
11. River Plate
12. Boca Juniors
13. Flamengo
14. Independiente
15. Sao Paulo
16. Porto
17. Penarol
18. Celtic
19. Feyenoord
20. Newcastle United!!! (no, not really) Corinthians

Who the eff are Penarol, sounds like a painkiller - not a football team.

Hmm i wouldve thought Chelsea to be somewhere in there but ok... at least higher than Feyenoord anyway

I'd probably have Sporting Lisbon in there, and theres a number of other�large clubs from Europe (Roma, PSV, Werder Bremen, Tottenham, Rangers and the�2/3 biggest clubs in each of Greece and Turkey)�who I would've thought would push Corinthians and Penarol out, but that's just a result of it being more difficult to get an understanding of�some�South American clubs from�New Zealand.�

Chelsea have zero history.I'd still like to explain how EG thinks the likes of Porto or Celtic are bigger than Arsenal. I wonder if he bases it on European Cups won. If that's the case, does he believe Forest are bigger than us too.

Anyway ranking United outside of the top two is bias.

Yeah, the lack of European success counted against Arsenal.

No other club on the list has never been continental or world club champion, so felt it unfair to include Arsenal because of that, although they're now clearly among the 3 biggest clubs in England. I'm sure many others would have them in the top 20.

Forest have only been champions of England once, clearly they're not a big club. Both Celtic and Porto have much more silverware than Arsenal full stop.

Hmm i wouldve thought Chelsea to be somewhere in there but ok... at least higher than Feyenoord anyway

To be honest, the numbering is a bit random - I'm no Real Madrid fan, but they're clearly number 1. After that, any of the next 5-6 clubs could easily be swapped around and there'd still be arguments. I had to rank them somehow, and that's how it turned out. On a different night I might have done it differently.

Fair enough, you make good points. I do however contend the part i highlighted in bold. Celtic and Porto may have won more titles than Arsenal, but they have done so in severely weaker leagues. And Feyenoord for example, are well behind both Ajax and PSV in terms of league titles yet i think you only include them based on one European Cup win 40 years ago. Why not include Villa for the one European Cup they won 30 years ago along with their 7 league titles?

But remember that the English league was not always ranked as highly as it is now, and that both Portuguese and Dutch leagues were much, much more tougher and competetive in the 1960s, 1970s and 1980s. Indeed, it was the sides from these countries that marked some of these times - Benfica in the 1960s, Ajax in the 1970s.

The point about Feyenoord is partly valid, and I did think about whether to include them or PSV - chose Feyenoord. Perhaps PSV should be there instead. But they're not only there because of the 1 European Cup (plenty of other clubs have done that) but because of their stature in Europe, which has admittedly now faded a bit.