Fuck the rest of the world
Tottenham have a larger UK fan base than Citeh or the southern branch of the EDL
-
The Fighting Cock is a forum for fans of Tottenham Hotspur Football Club. Here you can discuss Spurs latest matches, our squad, tactics and any transfer news surrounding the club. Registration gives you access to all our forums (including 'Off Topic' discussion) and removes most of the adverts (you can remove them all via an account upgrade). You're here now, you might as well...
Management ENIC
- Thread starter The Fighting Cock
- Start date
Latest Spurs videos from Sky Sports
Tottenham have a larger UK fan base than Citeh or the southern branch of the EDL
Well unfortunately the rest of the world exists. Not just your bubble.
When Gillingham have won more than our haul of 26 trophies, and Gillingham constantly look more likely to add to it, and players want to go to Gillingham over Spurs, and new football fans follow them rather than us, then yes, Gillingham would be a bigger club than us.
Being a "big club" is not permanent and it's not an entitlement based off past glories.
Counted them all have you?
What's your problem?
Believe what you like, I will never acknowledge any perceived achievement of Chelsea or Man city. All silverware (won lol) is tainted. Everyone knows they've broken FFP
Spurs also have a bigger American fan base than City or Chelsea, incidentally.
The nature of those projects have won them a lot of awe, but not much love.
My problem is comments like "Spurs are a bigger club than City and Chelsea"
That's wrong, it's daft, and it's embarrassing quite frankly.
If you'd have said were and acknowledged time, and that they are having theirs and we have had ours, then there would be no problem.
You can believe what you like, but when your beliefs are so obviously wrong, so easy to disprove, maybe it's best you don't share those beliefs.
You can suck them off as much as you want. It's easy to win stuff when the rules are constantly broken and the administrators are weak as piss water or taking back handers
A combination of things I guess.
Fanbase. Wealth. Stadium. History. Trophies.
Fanbase is an interesting one. Although Chelsea and City may sell more shirts world wide, if they had our trophy haul these last 20 years their fanbase would be dwarfed by ours.
We have a huge fanbase that's grown and stuck with us despite the recent barren decades. Imagine if we'd been just half as successful as them 2 clubs.
City and Chelsea are artificially big. Unlike ourselves and clubs like United, Liverpool and Woolwich.
Woolwich and Spurs used to be considered Londons big 2
One of my best mates is a Chelsea season ticket holder. The reason he hates Spurs so much is because he fears us. He knows they’ve been in a false position and he's terrified our normal stations will be reaffirmed, eventually.
Not being funny. It's why he wants Levy to stay
Pretty subjective then I guess, some people will see Chelsea as artificially bigger as you put it, some will see us historically bigger, there's no definitive answer.
There is a persistent smallness to Chelsea that I don't think is true of City, by contrast.
Love them or hate them, the Sheikhs have imperial ambitions for all aspects of the club's operations. Roman's Chelsea was just one man's toy. He spent a lot of money and won a lot of trophies, but in the end basically left behind the same club he bought.
That's actually the perfect analogy. I'm impressed
I just cut out all the waffle from your post and summarised it tbf.
Yes and no. I think financial doping has fucked it totally. Before doping you had clubs that over many many decades even going back to the 30’s built up a large fanbase and success through good management. United having periods like Busby and then Ferguson.
You could by fanbase and history point to a ‘’big club’’ and probably give it levels.
Level 1 - Liverpool, United size
Level 2 - Woolwich at the top
then Spurs, Villa, Everton, Forrest, Leeds, Newcastle
Level 3 Chelsea, West Ham etc
Since money you have the creation of artificial clubs like Chelsea, Man City and now Newcastle. They can do something no one previously could do which is spend vast fortunes of their owners money not their own money and buy success.
A big club is now really just a club that has a rich owner, it’s become fake. It’s like me turning up at the Tour de France on a motorcycle, winning the race 10 times in a row and declaring myself the best cyclists in history. It’s a complete nonsense but somehow it’s legal and it’s created a fake distorted football reality. It’s why people care about Liverpool and Woolwich winning things but don’t give a shit about City or Chavs winning things. Liverpool winning a quadruple means something, City winning a treble is meh.
A pretty good summary but I wouldn’t include Forest in the conversation. Their 70s success was a freak and they've never had the fanbase or the infrastucture to suggest they belong anywhere near the clubs you bracket them with.
Pretty much nobody outside of Nottinghamshire supports them.
I'd agree with Chelsea and West Ham being historically similar sized clubs though.
Uniteds huge club status was I think boosted by gaining a world wide wave of sympathy supporters following the Munich Air disaster.
They weren't. Not when you and I and
Archie
all started supporting Spurs. I don't know either of you, but I can tell that all 3 of us rightly believed Spurs were "kind of a big deal" probably up to the mid 90s
Fallen off a cliff since then. People keep saying how we've failed to win, failed to get over the line etc. What I see is a team that has, occasionally, punched well above its weight relative to teams around us.
Remember the league cup final against Chavs. Chav tickets going on the secondary market for £100 quid ours going for £200-300. For the champions league final ours going for £400-500 but Liverpool’s going for £1000. It showed fanbases, Liverpool above, us in the middle and Chelsea at the bottom.
I think our hardcore fanbase is still a lot bigger than Chavs. If there was a 200k stadium in London we could still fill it, I don’t think Chavs could but Chavs global Twitter fanbase is miles ahead of ours. They have a much bigger global following and more new fans, we still own the hardcore but for Chelsea that doesn’t matter as they aren’t funded by their fans they are funded by their owners.
I think our hardcore fanbase is still a lot bigger than Chavs. If there was a 200k stadium in London we could still fill it, I don’t think Chavs could but Chavs global Twitter fanbase is miles ahead of ours. They have a much bigger global following and more new fans, we still own the hardcore but for Chelsea that doesn’t matter as they aren’t funded by their fans they are funded by their owners.
Sarcasm is the lowest form of wit
I see your point but in Madrid £3000 (l offered) didn't get you ticket , there were double the Liverpool fans in the city but any end was gold dust and the same price