Will this season see the fall of the north-west and give rise to true London dominance?

Will this season see the fall of the north-west and give rise to true London dominance?

Other urls found in this thread:

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_football_clubs_in_England_by_competitive_honours_won
twitter.com/NSFWRedditGif

Hopefully

>1 CL

L
M
A
O

ROFLMAOOL

>tournament won by luck mattering

A spurs fan made this image

Why would that matter?

don't u forget about me.

Because the fact yids aren't crossed out is fucking hillarious

>spurs

get the fuck out. i'd understand chelsea and arsenal but fuck off with tottenham.

this desu
>b-but were a big club!

Its our year lad

They're as big as City

post the cheerleaders

City and Liverpool are both ahead of Spurs in pretty much every conceivable way.

the state of you lad

roll for your Crystal waifu
>dubs is 11
>trips is 12

try posting something of value next time

>trips is 12
I don't even want 12

not in the premier league era.

>They're as big as City

One of these is not like the others

I'm a Spurs fan lad and we are not a big club

Reminder that our stadium is literally called LONDON stadium and we have the word LONDON on our crest.

Is dare I say a more London club than West Ham?

Neither is City

>Man city flopping this season

Haha nah i dont think so

>Spurs
u wot

it's bigger than tottenlol.
city: 4 english leagues
tottenshit: 1

>4 points off the top eliminates you from the title race
is it your first season la? City are still in it.

>the city of Nottingham has more titles than London

>Spurs
2 league titles
8 FA Cups
3 UEFA Cups

>Man City
4 league titles
5 FA Cups
1 UEFA Cup

Neither of them are massive clubs, but historically Spurs have been more successful than Man City.

>Putting Arsenal and Spurs in the same bracket as the only team in London that actually wins relevant competitions
kys

>Liverpool have more European Cups than every other club in that image combined

in europe yes. In the league, no. That's like arguing that liverpool is a bigger club than united because they have 2 more champions league cups. City are bigger, especially in this era.

CWC isn't called the UEFA cup you bellend. Every shit team under the sun has won it, the community shield is more prestigious

Fuck the Spurs

Liverpool fan, so I feel I'm being, if anything, contrarian, but CWC was more relevant than the UEFA Cup.

>community shield more prestigious
CWC > UEFA cup

...

Ok, fine then. Spurs have 2 UEFA Cups and Man City have none. Doesn't really change my point.

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_football_clubs_in_England_by_competitive_honours_won

>tf
>tt
You don't even know what it was

spurs aren't a big club any more. they're literally everton tier in the current era. city are way bigger and have much bigger ambitions.

won*
(once)

I think the 4 PL titles over the past 12 years are pretty relevant

>spurs ever a big team
>city a big team because they have oil money

That's not me, that was some other guy who jumped into the conversation.

Guess it depends on how you're defining big club, since it's all relative. City and Spurs are both small clubs compared to the top-tier (Real, Barca, Bayern, United, Juve).

city are a bigger club la. Especially in the premiere league era where spurs have won literally nothing even remotely relevant

I have literally never heard Americans arguing about which one of their sport franchise is "bigger" than others. Such a weird argument to have.

Hell, they're small clubs compared to Liverpool, Milan, and Arsenal too, even though none of those 3 clubs have really done anything lately.

You've never heard a Cowboys fan insisting that Dallas is "America's Team"? Where do you live, and how much would it cost me to buy a house there?

there's not even an argument to be had

everyone knows it's man u then liverpool then a big gap then arsenal then a big gap then whoever the fuck cares after that

>city a big team because they have oil money

no because they've won the epl twice in the last 5 years. atletico madrid have won 1 league since forever but they're considered a big club in spain because they're competing at the top of their league. city have been competing for longer yet a lot of people here still don't consider them big.

aren't the browns shit on for being so irrelevant?
don't group arsenal with milan or liverpool, both are massively much bigger clubs. Arsenal are practically on par with a club like lazio or schalke.

>atletico madrid have won 1 league since forever but they're considered a big club in spain because they're competing at the top of their league

Atletico have about a dozen Spanish titles though. They're like the Spanish equivalent of Arsenal in terms of financial power and historical success, it's not as though they came out of nowhere.

Winning the PL or competing for it doesn't automatically make a club big. Imo Newcastle, Villa and Leeds are bigger clubs than City. They're not as good now obviously, but they have a far bigger (real) fan base

>arsenal are on par with lazio or schalke
tt
tp
kys

Does being America's team mean they are bigger than the New York Yankees or the New Pittsburgh Steelers?

I've heard arguments over who is more successful but never anything about how players wanting to move to a "bigger" club. Does anyone say they want to play for the Lakers instead of the Warriors because LA is the bigger club?

liverpool have 18 leagues but are considered mid table tier now by most people. history doesn't dictate everything.

>what are small market teams

At what point does Chelsea replace Arsenal in that list? There's obviously more to the "big club" discussion than just the number of trophies.

If you look at this century (so the past 16 years):

Chelsea: 4 titles,1 CL, 5 FA Cups, 1 EL, 3 league cups

Arsenal: 2 titles, 5 FA Cups

This is a football thread americuck

>it's not as though they came out of nowhere
well they kinda have, they got new investors and rebuilt the club. Ask anyone and they'll tell you that villareal, valencia and sevilla were all bigger clubs 5-10 years ago. Previous success doesn't warrant you a big club anymore
deal with it. Arsenal have the same amount of champions league's as west brom and haven't won the league in over a decade.

>Does anyone say they want to play for the Lakers instead of the Warriors because LA is the bigger club?

No, but plenty of players choose bigger markets or teams with a tradition of success.

Trophies, history, relevance, spending power etc.
There's a lot of elements

the "bigness" of a club isn't directly correlated to success and especially not recent success

chelsea will be a medium sized bunch of cab drivers who happen to have a large cheque book for at least another generation

>Actually caring about what is a big club or not
Maybe I've just been dulled by literally every single one team in Brazil thinking they're big, but all that matters is winning.

>deal with it
You don't know shit yet post as if you do

Don't know how old this is

>Previous success doesn't warrant you a big club anymore

So where is the cutoff? 5 years ago? 10 years ago?

Oh, ok. So Arsenal have more history, trophies, and spending power, so they're a bigger club even though Chelsea are more relevant.

Not a single brazilian team is big so that's understandable no one cares about it there

United have 64 now. But this list includes a lot of meme trophies like the Community Shield and UEFA Super Cup.

nice argument

>argue with me even though what i'm saying is complete bullshit
hmmm

Found a bunch of these old twitter memes on my phone. Kinda funny desu

>you now remember AC Milan

Christ

>chelsea and united not rich too
Shit meme pic

>can't think of an argument
>the other guy is wrong because I said so
great effort nigel

>teams named after a city
>there's no such city as Arsenal

Really makes you think...

RIP Parma

Man United has 1 intercontinental cup and 1 fifa club world cup. Only english team to win a """""""""world championship""""". Are brits afraid of south americans?

That's because your most of your "clubs" have no history or identity. NFL is the most plastic of your sports.

You could make the argument for baseball. Yankees, Cubs and Red Sox are much "bigger" than most other teams.

>Trophies, history, relevance, spending power etc.

>English clubs by spending power
1. United (577 million euros)
2. City (463 million)
3. Arsenal (435 million)
4. Chelsea (420 million)
5. Liverpool (391 million)
6. Spurs (257 million)

>English clubs by total trophies ("history")
1. United
2. Liverpool
3. Arsenal
4. Chelsea
5. Spurs
6. Man City

>English clubs by recent trophies (last decade, "relevance", starting with the 06-07 season)
1. United (3 leagues, 1 CL)
2. Chelsea (2 leagues, 1 CL)
3. Man City (2 leagues)
4. Arsenal (2 FA Cups)
5. Spurs (1 league cup)
6. Liverpool (1 league cup)

Spurs finished ahead of Liverpool in 6 out of the last 7 seasons, so they're ahead on the list.


>Average scores
1. United (1)
2. Chelsea (3.3)
3. Arsenal (3.3)
4. City (3.7)
5. Liverpool (4.3)
6. Spurs (5.7)

I used the CL as a tie-breaker for Chelsea and Arsenal.

*Spurs should be 5.3, not 5.7

Doesn't make much difference though

Woolwich Arsenal you cunt

They're named after a place in southeast London.

>This post

Never heard of that city in London.

Same with Everton. There's no City called Everton

But does it really matter?
For example, would a midtable Prem team that hasn't won shit in forever like WBA or Southampton rather remain like this or be like Nottingham Forest and end up in the Championship?

>English clubs by total trophies ("history")
1. United
2. Liverpool
3. Arsenal

====================================== #POWER GAP# ======================================

4. Chelsea
5. Spurs
6. Man City

It doesn't work like that. It's more of an intuitive thing. You just know who is the bigger club.

Liverpool and United are the big two. Then Arsenal

There are clubs in the Championship "bigger" than City

I'm trying to make it objective, and the other guy said that those were the ways people determined which club is "biggest".

post yfw city win the cl before arsenal

even aston villa have won more than spurs and city

this won't happen.

Everton is a district in Liverpool

Wait, but there are people in this thread saying that Man City are a big club.

Spurs: 24 trophies
Everton: 24 trophies
Aston Villa: 23 trophies
City: 18 trophies

So if it's just by total trophies, can we say that Villa, Everton, and Spurs are all bigger than Man City?

than city yeah but villa is 7th on the list with everton being joint 5th with spurs.

only a matter of time desu. City are only growing.

>trophies
>implying some fucking mickey mouse league cup is moe important than the premeire league title
nah fuck off, city are bigger than spurs and everton. Villa, maybe not

There's only one team not named after a city or an area in the league. Any guesses what it is?