AvfcTheObsession Posted September 5, 2013 Share Posted September 5, 2013 If I came on here 5 years ago & said Man City were a bigger Club than us I would have been laughed out of town. Similarly, if I had said the same thing about Chelsea pre Abramovich you would have called for the men in white coats to come & take me away & rightly so. These clubs have big backers nothing else. They have bought their success were as we have earned it. Is their model self sustaining? Only time will tell for sure but I suspect not & still fancy that our current strategy will be better in the long run. We are a Big Club. Period. I haven't said they are bigger than us, I just don't see how we can be considered a big club and Man City not one. I would disagree with your point that they have 'big backers and nothing else'. They've got a bigger fanbase than us, always have had. They've also got a tally in double figures of major domestic trophies won. Don't confuse them with Chelsea who have had PL crowds of less than 10,000 and had only won 3 major domestic trophies before Abramavich arrived. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
villa-revolution Posted September 5, 2013 Share Posted September 5, 2013 Man City have always lived in Man Utd's shadow. Have they won more cups or honours than us. Not even close. Should they eventually get their hands on the European Cup it will be because they have bought it just like Chelsea, where as we actually won it on merit. Man City fans are loyal, I will grant you that, but, were they getting gates of 48,000 plus when they were in the old 3rd division? The only good thing about having rich clubs like Man City & Chelsea about is that it ***** up Liverpool & Arsenal & Man Utd & hopefully gives us a chance to catch one of those 3 big clubs up in the meantime. Liverpool are the Club who are really feeling that pinch at the moment.No question. Ask any Liverpool fan if they are bigger than Chelsea or Man City & they will probably laugh. Bigger by a country mile. Richer? Not even close. We are exactly the same in comparison. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
briny_ear Posted September 5, 2013 Share Posted September 5, 2013 See, I think the problem is we don't really have a "new policy" or, if the club has one, it hasn't been spelt out in any detail. So people are just looking at what we're doing just now and assuming it is the new long term policy. Whereas it might just be a short term expedient. I think that's why this discussion is bouncing around rather aimlessly. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Oaks Posted September 5, 2013 Share Posted September 5, 2013 See, I think the problem is we don't really have a "new policy" or, if the club has one, it hasn't been spelt out in any detail. So people are just looking at what we're doing just now and assuming it is the new long term policy. Whereas it might just be a short term expedient. I think that's why this discussion is bouncing around rather aimlessly. It's the thing I worry about is are we going to Spend £10-15 million on 6-7 players every season, or will we be at at stage when we once again bring in 2-3 at a combined price of £20 million and maybe even more than that. If things go well in the next couple of years I think once again we can reclaim 7th as ours. Then what? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Marka Ragnos Posted September 5, 2013 VT Supporter Share Posted September 5, 2013 If I came on here 5 years ago & said Man City were a bigger Club than us I would have been laughed out of town. Similarly, if I had said the same thing about Chelsea pre Abramovich you would have called for the men in white coats to come & take me away & rightly so. These clubs have big backers nothing else. They have bought their success were as we have earned it. Is their model self sustaining? Only time will tell for sure but I suspect not & still fancy that our current strategy will be better in the long run. I wish you were right, but I think you're a bit of an optimist. The money-backed Insta-Big-Club-Just-Add-££££ is here to stay, I fear. The PL is such a terrible idea, a stinking media-driven toilet bowl of ego and international £££, and the poo now always rises to the top, it seems. In a better world, Villa's strategy would be rewarded. I hope I'm wrong and you're right. I agree, we're a Big Club by most definitions. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Papillon Posted September 5, 2013 Share Posted September 5, 2013 The argument about which club is bigger is such bullshit in my opinion. Any fan everywhere will always look at everything his own club is best at and always bring that up in every discussion. When we were 6th a few years ago and beat Liverpool, many people on here argued we were as big as them and that in no way could a Liverpool-fan claim otherwise. Yes, they had won trophies in the 80's but that didn't matter at all since we were better than them right now in the league. Then the table turns and we find ourselves in 15th last season, starting to talk about our overall ranking in the Premier League since its inception in 1992. Suddenly we were bigger than Tottenham and Everton because we had accumulated more points than them the last 20 years. Certainly bigger than Newcastle, West Ham and Man City, since they had fewer points. Not a single fan from those clubs would concur on that sentiment, not a single one. I have even seen talk about trophies in terms of being a bigger club, and of course it matters, but when someone mentions it without context it just falls apart. We won five of our seven league trophies before the 1800's had even finished, when the sport was totally different. Two world wars have passed in the meantime, and even Titanic went down after than 6th one. Now I am not taking away our trophies, in terms of numbers they count as much as something won in the 50's or the 80's (now I am talking 1950 and 1980, not 1880), in terms of numbers on a scoreboard, but don't tell me it has anything to do with stature in 2013. We have one league trophy in the last 100 years, namely in 1980-81 and then we won the European Cup in 1981-82. That counts a lot, that is not that long ago and football was more professional compared to the 1800's. Saying that, Nottingham Forest have won the cup twice, are they a bigger club than Chelsea? Of course not. Every single argument amongst fans depends on which club they are supporting, and every fan of every non-competing club like Villa or West Ham are arguing with results from over a 100 years back in time. Who cares? In no way are we a bigger club than Chelsea or Liverpool right now, we might claim that siting results from the 1800's but that counts for nothing when we compare recent results, amount of fans, TV-time, revenue, stadiums, players, recent players and heroes, culture etc etc. We perhaps have a better history in terms of trophies compared to let's say Chelsea and Man City, but that does not mean we are bigger right now. It just means we had a better team than them one hundred years ago. Finances changes everything pretty rapidly, someone wins and someone does not, we are just on the losing side like most of the others teams in the league. Then follows the bitter arguments about who is bigger... 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
villa-revolution Posted September 5, 2013 Share Posted September 5, 2013 The difference is though that even without the injection of obscene amounts of cash we still remain a big club. Even when we were in the 3rd Division we were still a massive concern. Imagine the potential of Aston Villa with a similar financial backing to that of Chelsea & Man City. Only then would the natural order be restored. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thetrees Posted September 8, 2013 Share Posted September 8, 2013 Are Man Utd a rich club? Yes Are Liverpool a rich club? No. Are Man City a rich club? Yes. Are Chelsea a rich club? Yes. Are Aston Villa a rich club? No. Are Man City a big club? No. Are Chelsea a big club?No. Are Liverpool a big club? Yes Are Aston Villa a Big Club? Yes. I looked at this first and then decided that the rest of your post was nonsense. Man City and Chelsea are big clubs. No they are not. They just happen to have big backers at the moment. One of them will disappear when they realise they can't dominate anymore because they can't out spend the other one to make it work. Man City have always been a big club on a par with the Villa. Just like Tottenham , Arsenal and Everton. Chelsea were a smalltime yo-yo club who weren't necessarily the biggest club in West London, but in the last 20 years they have become a truly big club, one that is rivalling the only two globally 'big' clubs from England, Liverpool and the Scum. We may not like it, but it's a fact. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts