|
Post by silsdenstokie on Sept 4, 2019 6:17:06 GMT
People have very out dated wiseideas about this ‘big club’ thing (stupid a concept as it is). It should just boil down to the fact that if a highly talented player was faced with a choice between say Bournemouth and Sheffield Wednesday who would he choose ? Bournemouth every time.......hence in every measure that matters they currently count as the ‘bigger’ club. Equally if they were faced with a choice between us and Wednesday (ie in the same division) they would choose the club that could pay them more - probably us. Wedenesday are twice as bigger club as Bournemouth. The fact a player would choose Bournemouth because they are in a higher league does not change that one bit. Likewise Leeds, Sunderlland etc
|
|
|
Post by GreaterGlasgowstokie on Sept 4, 2019 6:21:56 GMT
Sheffield Wednesday is a similar size club to stoke, when people start googling population size of a city you know we have another pointless thread.
But the population of stoke on trent and newcastle is well over 300,000 and Sheffield is 200k more approx.
It is a bigger city!
But the Sheffield clubs and stoke are all similar. Similar support although stoke have had better than both of them over the last decade. Similar years in total in the top flight, stoke are a couple of years behind Sheffield Wednesday and ahead of sheffield United.
Outside of stoke, people would not say that any are bigger than the other, they all fall into a category of about 15 clubs at the bottom of the prem or in the champ who historically have spent over 50 seasons in the top flight.
The problem with people in stoke is they like to think of their club as smaller underdogs. Not true though.
|
|
|
Post by GreaterGlasgowstokie on Sept 4, 2019 6:22:56 GMT
People have very out dated wiseideas about this ‘big club’ thing (stupid a concept as it is). It should just boil down to the fact that if a highly talented player was faced with a choice between say Bournemouth and Sheffield Wednesday who would he choose ? Bournemouth every time.......hence in every measure that matters they currently count as the ‘bigger’ club. Equally if they were faced with a choice between us and Wednesday (ie in the same division) they would choose the club that could pay them more - probably us. Wedenesday are twice as bigger club as Bournemouth. The fact a player would choose Bournemouth because they are in a higher league does not change that one bit. Likewise Leeds, Sunderlland etc Nonsense, Bournemouth are a bigger club than stoke, Sheffield wednesday or Sunderland at this point in time. We live in the present don't we?
|
|
|
Post by chad on Sept 4, 2019 6:44:43 GMT
Wish we’d have gone for this pair instead of Jones
|
|
|
Post by Gods on Sept 4, 2019 7:11:36 GMT
They were once, now they are just another provincial club in the 2nd flight of English football sharing a small city not really large enough for 2 football league clubs. They are one place below us in the average league attendances table this season. They have more trophies in the cabinet but that no longer counts for anything. is Sheffield a small city? No I'm wrong about that, I just query if it can sustain 2 highly successful football league teams,but may be it can, Liverpool and Manchester do.
|
|
|
Post by zerps on Sept 4, 2019 7:29:10 GMT
They ended up being right. Money is everything. Fan base counts for nothing in the 21st century. I'm pretty sure it was the fan base that took Benitez to Newcastle. Doubt he went there for what Ashley allowed him to spend. I’d say it was his wages
|
|
|
Post by str8outtahampton on Sept 4, 2019 7:53:47 GMT
Sheffield Wednesday is a similar size club to stoke, when people start googling population size of a city you know we have another pointless thread. But the population of stoke on trent and newcastle is well over 300,000 and Sheffield is 200k more approx. It is a bigger city! But the Sheffield clubs and stoke are all similar. Similar support although stoke have had better than both of them over the last decade. Similar years in total in the top flight, stoke are a couple of years behind Sheffield Wednesday and ahead of sheffield United. Outside of stoke, people would not say that any are bigger than the other, they all fall into a category of about 15 clubs at the bottom of the prem or in the champ who historically have spent over 50 seasons in the top flight. The problem with people in stoke is they like to think of their club as smaller underdogs. Not true though. Comparing size is an endless and ultimately subjective exercise. However, I think that Sheff Wed are a bigger club than us - against virtually every relevant measure. And I also think outside Stoke (and Sheffield) the overwhelming majority of people would agree with that. That is an opinion, of course. Not a fact.
|
|
|
Post by wuzza on Sept 4, 2019 8:15:31 GMT
People have very out dated wiseideas about this ‘big club’ thing (stupid a concept as it is). It should just boil down to the fact that if a highly talented player was faced with a choice between say Bournemouth and Sheffield Wednesday who would he choose ? Bournemouth every time.......hence in every measure that matters they currently count as the ‘bigger’ club. Equally if they were faced with a choice between us and Wednesday (ie in the same division) they would choose the club that could pay them more - probably us. Wedenesday are twice as bigger club as Bournemouth. The fact a player would choose Bournemouth because they are in a higher league does not change that one bit. Likewise Leeds, Sunderlland etc They have won more trophies in the past, and more people attend their games - which in the here and now means the square root of nothing.
|
|
|
Post by thevoid on Sept 4, 2019 8:30:14 GMT
Don't start, you'll wake that eebygum halfwit up
|
|
|
Post by Gary Hackett on Sept 4, 2019 8:30:56 GMT
It'll be interesting to see how he does in comparison to Jones.
|
|
|
Post by thevoid on Sept 4, 2019 8:31:16 GMT
They were once, now they are just another provincial club in the 2nd flight of English football sharing a small city not really large enough for 2 football league clubs. This isn't really true. The whole of Sheffield is at least twice as big as the whole of Stoke (conurbation/catchment) hence why Sheffield has two clubs that would likely argue they're bigger than Stoke City, whereas Stoke-On-Trent has us and then a club that wouldn't look out of place in the conference. What if you factor in Newcastle-under-Lyme though?
|
|
|
Post by thevoid on Sept 4, 2019 8:34:04 GMT
Wedenesday are twice as bigger club as Bournemouth. The fact a player would choose Bournemouth because they are in a higher league does not change that one bit. Likewise Leeds, Sunderlland etc Nonsense, Bournemouth are a bigger club than stoke, Sheffield wednesday or Sunderland at this point in time. We live in the present don't we? No, they're a much smaller club currently playing at a higher level. Tiny ground, no silverware. Small club. And based on history, Sheff Weds are bigger than us.
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 4, 2019 8:35:06 GMT
This isn't really true. The whole of Sheffield is at least twice as big as the whole of Stoke (conurbation/catchment) hence why Sheffield has two clubs that would likely argue they're bigger than Stoke City, whereas Stoke-On-Trent has us and then a club that wouldn't look out of place in the conference. What if you factor in Newcastle-under-Lyme though? I did. I class the conurbation + catchment as about half a million, which is maybe generous. By the same criteria Sheffield is more than a million.
|
|
|
Post by spitthedog on Sept 4, 2019 8:52:55 GMT
People have very out dated ideas about this ‘big club’ thing (stupid a concept as it is). It should just boil down to the fact that if a highly talented player was faced with a choice between say Bournemouth and Sheffield Wednesday who would he choose ? Bournemouth every time.......hence in every measure that matters they currently count as the ‘bigger’ club. Equally if they were faced with a choice between us and Wednesday (ie in the same division) they would choose the club that could pay them more - probably us. It's a ridiculous and pointless argument if you take completely different criteria as a way of judging what is a big club. You are taking financial criteria. My own criteria would be based on fan base, which is completely different. Since I'm an old school person who still thinks football is more about fans than money I take the latter. The other possible criteria I could think of would be based on historical achievement.
|
|
|
Post by spitthedog on Sept 4, 2019 9:00:15 GMT
I think Sheffield Weds would get bigger crowds if they lowered their prices.
The cheapest ticket you can get is £36. It's way too high for most people in that area.
I work in Sheffield regularly and I know that puts a lot of people off, who then go to non-league games or don't bother.
|
|
|
Post by wuzza on Sept 4, 2019 9:23:21 GMT
People have very out dated ideas about this ‘big club’ thing (stupid a concept as it is). It should just boil down to the fact that if a highly talented player was faced with a choice between say Bournemouth and Sheffield Wednesday who would he choose ? Bournemouth every time.......hence in every measure that matters they currently count as the ‘bigger’ club. Equally if they were faced with a choice between us and Wednesday (ie in the same division) they would choose the club that could pay them more - probably us. It's a ridiculous and pointless argument if you take completely different criteria as a way of judging what is a big club. You are taking financial criteria. My own criteria would be based on fan base, which is completely different. Since I'm an old school person who still thinks football is more about fans than money I take the latter. The other possible criteria I could think of would be based on historical achievement. Fan base is a moveable feast - it would certainly of counted for nothing back in the day when the likes of Huddersfield would be drawing very large crowds because they were a winning team , nobody mentioned it then. Equally you could argue that someone like Crystal Palace who are by tradition a 2nd / 3rd division team (in old money) could get massive crowds now if the ground was big enough due to the catchment area of South London which provides numbers and high disposable income. In reality fan numbers mean little in terms of a club’s ability to achieve success as gate receipts now provide such a small % of a club’s income in the top leagues. The bottom line is surely that if a good player from abroad was offered a choice of clubs would they be impressed by a team’s attendances or their league record in the 1930’s ? All that matters is the club’s ability to pay big money. If there must be a measure of ‘bigness’ the only meaningful one is surely the capacity to pay out the money to achieve some measure of success. Everything else is just a perception usually clung on to by supporters needing a comfort blanket for their team’s lack of success. I would argue that if Lincoln currently had billionaire owners someone like Cowley would not countenance a move to Sheff Weds.
|
|
|
Post by nottinghamstokie on Sept 4, 2019 9:54:19 GMT
Mmm.... young manager gets his team into League 1 and promptly gets them quickly to the top of said division.
Then a Championship club comes calling
I'm sure I've heard that somewhere before, just can't place it.....
|
|
|
Post by jimmygscfc on Sept 4, 2019 9:59:26 GMT
I was talking to a Lincoln fan over the weekend at a festival and they absolutely love him and his brother up there. I think they'd be gutted to lose him just as they climb to second but would the Cowleys turn it down?
|
|
|
Post by strangerthingshappen on Sept 4, 2019 10:12:18 GMT
Nonsense, Bournemouth are a bigger club than stoke, Sheffield wednesday or Sunderland at this point in time. We live in the present don't we? No, they're a much smaller club currently playing at a higher level. Tiny ground, no silverware. Small club. And based on history, Sheff Weds are bigger than us. So depending on what its based on the goalposts can be moved in whichever direction to accomodate any given theory ???? That could get very puzzling very quickly.....
|
|
|
Post by str8outtahampton on Sept 4, 2019 10:42:32 GMT
It's a ridiculous and pointless argument if you take completely different criteria as a way of judging what is a big club. You are taking financial criteria. My own criteria would be based on fan base, which is completely different. Since I'm an old school person who still thinks football is more about fans than money I take the latter. The other possible criteria I could think of would be based on historical achievement. Fan base is a moveable feast - it would certainly of counted for nothing back in the day when the likes of Huddersfield would be drawing very large crowds because they were a winning team , nobody mentioned it then. Equally you could argue that someone like Crystal Palace who are by tradition a 2nd / 3rd division team (in old money) could get massive crowds now if the ground was big enough due to the catchment area of South London which provides numbers and high disposable income. In reality fan numbers mean little in terms of a club’s ability to achieve success as gate receipts now provide such a small % of a club’s income in the top leagues. The bottom line is surely that if a good player from abroad was offered a choice of clubs would they be impressed by a team’s attendances or their league record in the 1930’s ? All that matters is the club’s ability to pay big money. If there must be a measure of ‘bigness’ the only meaningful one is surely the capacity to pay out the money to achieve some measure of success. Everything else is just a perception usually clung on to by supporters needing a comfort blanket for their team’s lack of success. I would argue that if Lincoln currently had billionaire owners someone like Cowley would not countenance a move to Sheff Weds. If your argument is accurate, it would suggest that it is pure coincidence that the overwhelming number of trophies (even since 1992) have been won by teams attracting the highest crowds - and indeed from places with the biggest populations. Highly unlikely. In this specific example, Cowley would be weighing a number of factors in the balance. One of those factors would be money. Of course it would. But so would the profile of the club and its ability, over a reasonable period, to achieve success. Managing Sheff Wed is simply a "bigger" job than managing Lincoln. And for the foreseeable future that will remain the case. But it's subjective, and I cannot say my opinion is more valid than yours.
|
|
|
Post by thevoid on Sept 4, 2019 11:13:56 GMT
No, they're a much smaller club currently playing at a higher level. Tiny ground, no silverware. Small club. And based on history, Sheff Weds are bigger than us. So depending on what its based on the goalposts can be moved in whichever direction to accomodate any given theory ???? That could get very puzzling very quickly..... It shouldn't be unless you overcomplicate things unnecessarily. Bournemouth, 11,000 capacity stadium, spent most of their history in the bottom two divisions, no major silverware- small club having an hour in the sun, a bit like clubs such as Luton, Notts Co and Oldham have done in the past.
|
|
|
Post by Edward Tattsyrup on Sept 4, 2019 11:21:41 GMT
They were once, now they are just another provincial club in the 2nd flight of English football sharing a small city not really large enough for 2 football league clubs. This isn't really true. The whole of Sheffield is at least twice as big as the whole of Stoke (conurbation/catchment) hence why Sheffield has two clubs that would likely argue they're bigger than Stoke City, whereas Stoke-On-Trent has us and then a club that wouldn't look out of place in the conference. Out of place in the conference? I'm not sure Kidsgrove are ready for that just yet!
|
|
|
Post by Davef on Sept 4, 2019 11:39:20 GMT
Wish we’d have gone for this pair instead of Jones And if we had and it had gone tits up and if Jones had have carried on his work at Luton and being appointed Sheffield Wednesday manager you'd have wished we'd have gone for him...
|
|
|
Post by serpico on Sept 4, 2019 12:24:16 GMT
Can only assume the capped one turned them down if certain media articles are to be believed. If so, why ? 👀
|
|
|
Post by Staffsoatcake on Sept 4, 2019 12:34:49 GMT
Just because we have played in higher division than Wed for 10 years doesn't make us bigger,the same goes for Leeds. They get bigger crowds,have more trophies,we are on par with Middlesbrough,similar crowds,trophies and Tony fucking Pulis.
|
|
|
Post by PotterLog on Sept 4, 2019 12:38:51 GMT
Sheff Wed are fucking miles bigger than Stoke and both are fucking miles bigger than Bournemouth. Honestly what are people on
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 4, 2019 12:52:10 GMT
It'll be interesting to see how he does in comparison to Jones. He can't possibly do worse.
|
|
|
Post by str8outtahampton on Sept 4, 2019 12:52:18 GMT
Sheff Wed are fucking miles bigger than Stoke and both are fucking miles bigger than Bournemouth. Honestly what are people on Polvo de mono in some cases, I suspect.
|
|
|
Post by shakermaker on Sept 4, 2019 14:39:39 GMT
Wish we’d have gone for this pair instead of Jones And if we had and it had gone tits up and if Jones had have carried on his work at Luton and being appointed Sheffield Wednesday manager you'd have wished we'd have gone for him... No reason to think the Cowleys would be as successful at SWFC. Look at NJ... take him out of his comfort zone, away from his support network and his capabilities have been ruthlessly exposed. I hope SWFC are learning from us and doing due diligence into Lincoln's recruitment setup and how much of a factor that's been in their success.
|
|
|
Post by okeydokeystokie2 on Sept 4, 2019 15:13:25 GMT
There's an argument to say that Bournemouth is part of what's wrong with modern football. No big fan base, no history. The "Premier League" sometimes throws up a fixture like Bournemouth v Brighton which makes a bit of a joke of the so-called best league in the world.
It's absurd to say Bournemouth a bigger club than Sheffield Wednesday. They have been a part of a football community for generations of families.
If (please Lord) Manchester United were to be relegated, they would still be the biggest club in the country, at least in the medium term.
Sheffield is one of those cities that has two clubs both capable of pulling 30,000 plus supporters into their grounds. Only London, Manchester, Liverpool, Glasgow, Istanbul, Buenos Aries and possibly Madrid, maybe Milan, can boast that.
|
|