Sydneybcfc Posted May 13, 2015 Report Share Posted May 13, 2015 OK so when we drew West Ham this year there was a lot of grumbling that we never get anyone 'big' and we had just played the hammers in the league a few seasons ago. This has got me thinking, where do people feel we sit in the 92 for Glamour Ties? So this is hopefully different from the usual 'how big are we' conversation, you need to imagine you are a fan of a non-league team (not that one) and have no existing rivalries and geolocation doesn't matter. Your team has reached the first round of the cup and all 92 league teams come into it and you draw the mighty Bristol City... I'm going to base it on this season where we finished 45th in the league, discounting the premiership teams (because there is an argument we are more glamours than Burnley) and ignoring where everyone else finished this season where do you think we finish on the glamour scale and who do you think needs to be swapped from lower to higher and vice versa. Teams below us more glamorous: Wimbledon - Tough one as they are a new co and not the original but i think the name still carries some clout Portsmouth - Long time in the Prem Sheffield United Preston Bradford Coventry - Dave Rennie Teams in the championship less glamorous: Bournemouth - As i said ignoring final positions Brentford same as Bournemouth Huddersfield Rotherham Blackpool There are to my mind a couple that could go either way, but i think that keeps up soundly 'mid-table' at 46th in the Non-Leagues most glamorous ties one below our final league position. Agree? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Major Isewater Posted May 13, 2015 Report Share Posted May 13, 2015 For me any tie involving City is a glamour tie (except Gillingham obviously) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jesus Posted May 13, 2015 Report Share Posted May 13, 2015 Here are some of my favourite glamour ties Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Robin1988 Posted May 13, 2015 Report Share Posted May 13, 2015 That brown one is horrible. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ben4BCFC Posted May 13, 2015 Report Share Posted May 13, 2015 That brown one is horrible. And the others aren't? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Roger Red Hat Posted May 13, 2015 Report Share Posted May 13, 2015 Here are some of my favourite glamour ties Personally, I've always been a cravat man myself. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted May 13, 2015 Report Share Posted May 13, 2015 I don't think there is a degree of glamour such that you could 'rank' the 92 - it's either glamourous or not. For example, I'm no more excited about a game against QPR than I am Brentford - not in any distinguishable amount anyway. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BigTone Posted May 13, 2015 Report Share Posted May 13, 2015 Personally, I've always been a cravat man myself. But cravat is French for tie ! I like the pink one Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Aizoon Posted May 13, 2015 Report Share Posted May 13, 2015 Are they on sale in the Megastore? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HLR Posted May 13, 2015 Report Share Posted May 13, 2015 Are they on sale in the Megastore? Yellow one isn't Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Major Isewater Posted May 13, 2015 Report Share Posted May 13, 2015 But cravat is French for tie ! I like the pink one "Cravate" ,the proper spelling in French ,don't you know , is a bastardisation of the word " Croat " from whence originally came the neck garment. The Croatian army of yore wore a tie when going into and out of battle .The French found this very fetching and it became a fashion in high society . I believe the illustration is a photo taken from Marc Bolan's dressing room . Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Roger Red Hat Posted May 13, 2015 Report Share Posted May 13, 2015 But cravat is French for tie ! I like the pink one But I'm using the word in the 'english toff' sense. Tally-ho! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Major Isewater Posted May 13, 2015 Report Share Posted May 13, 2015 But I'm using the word in the 'english toff' sense. Tally-ho! Why did n't you say ,old boy ? What ,what. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tall King Blox Posted May 13, 2015 Report Share Posted May 13, 2015 Marc Bolan...pah....I prefer the Vince Cable collection...... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
YorkshireSection Posted May 13, 2015 Report Share Posted May 13, 2015 But I'm using the word in the 'english toff' sense. Tally-ho!A toff wouldnt wear a cravat, cravats are generally worn by the more flamboyant, artistic, guardian reading, red trousered types, quaffers of a good Shiraz. Toffs, picture range rover, brogues and a 3 piece country cloth garmented gentlemen with a tie emblassened with a coat of arms, possibly relating back to his aristocracy or university/school. He's looking over the rims of his spectacles frantically checking the back pages of the times looking for the Middlesex scorecards, he also uses a fountain pen to do the telegraph crossword, tally ho! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
And Its Smith Posted May 13, 2015 Report Share Posted May 13, 2015 No need to have "ok, so" in opening post. We are a yoyo team between Championship and League one. Not glamourous at all. Don't see why we are more glamourous than Huddersfield. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
YorkshireSection Posted May 13, 2015 Report Share Posted May 13, 2015 No need to have "ok, so" in opening post. We are a yoyo team between Championship and League one. Not glamourous at all. Don't see why we are more glamourous than Huddersfield. I'd guess the conclusion would be drawn from our aesthetic draw as a city in comparison to Huddersfield, nothing to do with the teams. I'd agree, Huddersfield are no less a team/club than us. Their stadia is both modern and unique, ours is in the process of being the same yet obviously bettter ;-) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sydneybcfc Posted May 13, 2015 Author Report Share Posted May 13, 2015 No need to have "ok, so" in opening post. We are a yoyo team between Championship and League one. Not glamourous at all. Don't see why we are more glamourous than Huddersfield. It probably could have done with a little more punctuation but it was really just trying to change the topic from the Gas Mega thread and Joe Edwards which seems to be all anyone wants to talk about since the close season. It was really a topic to gauge peoples opinions on where they think we sit, reading this forum sometimes you would think that all other clubs are ecstatic to play us whereas i think for 99% they probably think playing us in the cup is a rubbish draw. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
And Its Smith Posted May 13, 2015 Report Share Posted May 13, 2015 It probably could have done with a little more punctuation but it was really just trying to change the topic from the Gas Mega thread and Joe Edwards which seems to be all anyone wants to talk about since the close season. It was really a topic to gauge peoples opinions on where they think we sit, reading this forum sometimes you would think that all other clubs are ecstatic to play us whereas i think for 99% they probably think playing us in the cup is a rubbish draw. Honestly can't see why a Bradford fan would think we are any more glamorous than Swindon, for example. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sydneybcfc Posted May 13, 2015 Author Report Share Posted May 13, 2015 Honestly can't see why a Bradford fan would think we are any more glamorous than Swindon, for example. That's why i was talking about a nondescript Non-League team. I guess the acid test criteria would be if said Non-League team had an unlimited capacity, which teams would draw the biggest home crowd along to watch. Again its all just opinions, not something that could be proven either way. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mad Cyril Posted May 13, 2015 Report Share Posted May 13, 2015 46 clubs have played in the Premiership. We have not. 23 clubs have won the top league. We have not. We have a lush suspension bridge though. Christ, we're massive. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
richwwtk Posted May 13, 2015 Report Share Posted May 13, 2015 No need to have "ok, so" in opening post. We are a yoyo team between Championship and League one. Not glamourous at all. Don't see why we are more glamourous than Huddersfield. It could be argued that Huddersfield, having won the league three years running, rank above us in those terms Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cidered abroad Posted May 13, 2015 Report Share Posted May 13, 2015 I'd guess the conclusion would be drawn from our aesthetic draw as a city in comparison to Huddersfield, nothing to do with the teams. I'd agree, Huddersfield are no less a team/club than us. Their stadia is both modern and unique, ours is in the process of being the same yet obviously bettter ;-) And one should never forget that in the 1920's, under Herbert Chapman, Huddersfield Town won the First Division title, three years running. Yes they have never recreated that but it should put them higher up the ladder than City? Chapman moved to manage Arsenal and repeated the three consecutive First Division titles in early 1930's. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
richwwtk Posted May 13, 2015 Report Share Posted May 13, 2015 And one should never forget that in the 1920's, under Herbert Chapman, Huddersfield Town won the First Division title, three years running. Yes they have never recreated that but it should put them higher up the ladder than City? Chapman moved to manage Arsenal and repeated the three consecutive First Division titles in early 1930's. Chapman didn't win all three titles with Huddersfield, he left before the third was won iirc. He also only won two titles with Arsenal, the second of them being the first of their three consecutive titles. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cidered abroad Posted May 13, 2015 Report Share Posted May 13, 2015 Chapman didn't win all three titles with Huddersfield, he left before the third was won iirc. He also only won two titles with Arsenal, the second of them being the first of their three consecutive titles. Thanks for correcting my errors. I have just read his football history on Wikipedia and found it very interesting. A forward thinker indeed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
iamalagerdrinker Posted May 14, 2015 Report Share Posted May 14, 2015 Lincoln for me as I live a 15 minute walk away! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
richwwtk Posted May 14, 2015 Report Share Posted May 14, 2015 Thanks for correcting my errors. I have just read his football history on Wikipedia and found it very interesting. A forward thinker indeed. Apologies, didn't mean to come over all headmasterish, I think I'm just a pedant for things like that He certainly was a manager way ahead of his time. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
newarkred Posted May 14, 2015 Report Share Posted May 14, 2015 Lincoln for me as I live a 15 minute walk away
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.