How do you define how “big” a club is?

[Red-Robbo]

15 hours ago, redkev said:

I’m sorry for having an opinion  just jesting it’s just how I feel when I’m down that neck of the woods which isn’t that often tbf . Bournemouth doesn’t do it for me I’m afraid 

 

No worries.

I lived there once. Liked the sunny microclimate and beach vibe - and I met some fantastic women there, which means it'll always hold fond memories for me... 

[RoystonFoote'snephew]

It's defined by history for me, although winning a European trophy helps as it puts a club on the global stage (but it's not essential). It's certainly not about money. Johnny come lately's like Manchester City will never be a bigger club than Manchester United and Chelsea will never be bigger than the Arsenal. As for Bristol City we pray for high spits to come but we'll never be bigger than the likes of Southampton, Leeds, Burnley or Forest. 

[Supersonic Robin]

 As others have said, it's hard to define a "big club" because the word "big" is so vague.

The following would be relevant considerations IMO:

1. Current standard / recent achievements (Realistically, the most important thing - how good are you right now? How good have you been in the last decade?)
2. Historical achievements (Useful, but probably the most overrated measure. No one cares if you won the FA Cup in 1904. It has no modern day relevance)
3. Fanbase / Attendances (A good measure. Note that social media followers is an awful way to assess this)
4. Facilities (How big, shiny, modern, and high tech is your stadium and training ground?)
5. Revenue generation / Spending Power (Maybe a bit boring, but realistically a great measure of a business' size)
6. Geographical Significance (Are you the biggest club in your city/county? How big is the area your club dominates? After all, clubs represent places and people)

19 hours ago, ChippenhamRed said:

I made the claim on twitter earlier that we are the biggest club never to have played Premier League football.

To my mind, the size of a club is less about what it has won and more to do with the size of its fanbase and its whole infrastructure.

We regularly attract crowds of 20k+, we are capable of taking 45k to a JPT final against Walsall, we have a fantastic modern 27k stadium and first rate training facilities. All of which, I think, makes us the “biggest” club never to have played in the Premier League.

I’ve since had a debate with someone on twitter who thinks Preston, Notts County and Millwall are all bigger than us. Millwall is clearly a nonsense claim on any measure, but the argument for Preston and Notts County is on the basis of honours.

FWIW, I think we're comfortably the biggest club to have never played in the Premier League.

Naturally I'll sound biased on this, but the idea that Millwall, PNE, or Notts f****** County are bigger than us is absolutely laughable.

• In Millwall, you're looking at a club who have achieved a similar amount to us historically, but who are clearly inferior to us in terms of facilities, fanbase, revenues, etc.
   
• PNE are again inferior to us by almost every measure, with the exception of trophies won over 100 years ago. Respectfully, trophies won in the 1800s cannot form part of any serious debate about which club is bigger in 2023.
   
• I'm not even going to bother discussing Notts County, who were playing in the Conference last season. You might as well compare us to Bath City.

 

18 hours ago, ExiledAjax said:

IMO clubs like Notts County, Oldham, Preston North End etc are historic clubs, notable clubs, perhaps even venerable clubs. But that is different to being a "big" club, which is more determined by more modern metrics such as those discussed above. 

5 hours ago, ExiledAjax said:

All I know is the "look" you get when someone asks "who's your team then" at a party or in the pub or on your first day in the office. You say "Bristol City". And they miss a beat. Their face glazes over. They are wracking their brain for something, anything, ANYTHING, to say about us. Eventually you might get an "oh yeh we bought [player] from you didn't we". And then the conversation moves back to their team.

A couple of very good points here from @ExiledAjax. 

Essentially, there is a difference between being a "big club" and an "interesting club".

Many of the clubs mentioned in this thread are objectively smaller than us, but many of them are also more interesting than we are. They have a 'thing' - an interesting fact or a moment in history. They appear, if only briefly, at some point in the story of English football history, whereas we don't.

Even as a Bristol City fan, I have to acknowledge that, historically speaking, we're one of the least interesting clubs in the top 2-3 divisions of English football.

[Lew-T]

10 hours ago, 2015 said:

Depends on when you were growing up really.

We're not a 'big' club. We're a club from a big City, but that's where the 'big' ends. 

We have a very average history, i'm sorry to say it.

I also don't think you can measure a big club on major honours nowadays because if you are not Man City, Man Utd, Liverpool, Newcastle, Spurs, Arsenal or Chelsea the chances are it is very unlikely you'd win a major trophy. Leicester are the exception to that rule, I know, but Football was different 30+ years ago and you would have the likes of Wimbledon and Coventry winning the FA Cup and Oxford, Swindon, Norwich winning the League Cup.

It is a depressing thought.
 

Because like you mention, the football years ago was more fairly balanced of teams winning trophies. With the money in the Premier League now though, it’s more or less the same 6 teams winning domestic trophies.

We unfortunately missed the boat in the 50s/60s/70s when all sort of teams were picking up trophies. 
 

We won’t get that chance again.

[Supersonic Robin]

2 hours ago, Lew-T said:

It is a depressing thought.
 

Because like you mention, the football years ago was more fairly balanced of teams winning trophies. With the money in the Premier League now though, it’s more or less the same 6 teams winning domestic trophies.

We unfortunately missed the boat in the 50s/60s/70s when all sort of teams were picking up trophies. 
 

We won’t get that chance again.

Agree - I think that's part of the reason we've lagged behind many other teams who, in theory, should be no bigger than us. They had a period of success, and in doing so, grew their brand and fanbase. We didn't have that. 

There is still a chance to win trophies though. Swansea, Birmingham, and Wigan have all won major domestic trophies in the last couple of decades. I wouldn't be surprised to see Brighton or Brentford do the same in the near future. I genuinely believe that winning a domestic trophy isn't completely out of our reach (obviously not anytime soon).