Who is the bigger club? Arsenal or Chelsea?

[Efcjake]

It really doesn't make that much sense though. Are we bigger than Barcelona? They were created 21 years after we were and we had already won the league before them.

Ask anyone who started following more than 120 years ago and they will say Everton...

Chelsea and Arsenal are pretty much on par with each other currently.

No. Barcelona have won loads more than we have. Thats a really poor comparison and there's no relevance to bring us into this.

Arsenal dominated the league along with Utd for over a decade before Chelsea had won much at all.

They've won loads of trophies, including some over the last decade.

Chelsea are a big club. They just aren't as big a club as Arsenal and haven't won't anywhere near as much besides the Champions League they have that Arsenal doesn't.

 

[Papa Shango]

That’s no measure of them being a bigger club, though. More players would pick City than United when United are 50x the size.

That's "fans" though. How much of a metric is that either?

Players will tend to want to go to the most successful club they can play for. For me that's the only true metric that actually means anything when judging these things.

 

[Efcjake]

It really doesn't make that much sense though. Are we bigger than Barcelona? They were created 21 years after we were and we had already won the league before them.

Ask anyone who started following more than 120 years ago and they will say Everton...

Chelsea and Arsenal are pretty much on par with each other currently.

A better comparison would be us and Leicester.

They've won the league but I still don't think they're a bigger club than us.

 

[Papa Shango]

No. Barcelona have won loads more than we have. Thats a really poor comparison and there's no relevance to bring us into this.

Arsenal dominated the league along with Utd for over a decade before Chelsea had won much at all.

They've won loads of trophies, including some over the last decade.

Chelsea are a big club. They just aren't as big a club as Arsenal and haven't won't anywhere near as much besides the Champions League they have that Arsenal doesn't.

Of course there is a relevance to bring us into it as lets face it that's where the discussion comes from as we are aware that we are not longer one of the big clubs (though maybe soon...)

I know what they have won, at this exact moment in time though I think Chelsea are a slightly bigger draw. I don't think there is much in it to be fair.

 

[Tipp blue]

Take an Irish 6 or 7 year old with no geographical link to either... just starting to get interested in football, which of the 2 is he more likley to choose, it's going to be Chelsea these days..

 

[longers]

Loads more Arsenal and Spurs fans in London than Chelsea fans, it’s not even close.

Chelsea probably have bigger global fanbase though as their success coincided with the premier leagues huge growth abroad in the mid 2000s

 

[Azzurri]

That's "fans" though. How much of a metric is that either?

Players will tend to want to go to the most successful club they can play for. For me that's the only true metric that actually means anything when judging these things.

That’s basically the only metric I judge it on. Actual fans and trophies/sustained top flight. I’d say Newcastle are a bigger club than Forest, despite what the trophies say, because they have always had much bigger attendances. And United are still a much bigger club than City despite the latter’s recent success, no City fan would disagree.

Being a ‘big club’ doesn’t matter anywhere near as much as it used to re. signing players any more. Like you say they’ll go to the most successful club they can play for. Where a player would go isn’t a metric of who’s bigger.

 

[Tipp blue]

A better comparison would be us and Leicester.

They've won the league but I still don't think they're a bigger club than us.

Leicester are a vardy injury away from mid table.

 

[Papa Shango]

A better comparison would be us and Leicester.

They've won the league but I still don't think they're a bigger club than us.

Leicester is a kind of strange anomaly. I can't see them ever being that big even with success, they have a ceiling, probably because they have never really acted like a big club. City and Chelsea started to act like big clubs and it kind of stuck eventually.

 

[Azzurri]

Take an Irish 6 or 7 year old with no geographical link to either... just starting to get interested in football, which of the 2 is he more likley to choose, it's going to be Chelsea these days..

Not really the point, though. He’d also choose Leicester over Arsenal and you can’t tell me they’re the bigger club.

 

[degsy]

No, that would be the smell of crack and heroin fumes.

And wee

 

[Efcjake]

Of course there is a relevance to bring us into it as lets face it that's where the discussion comes from as we are aware that we are not longer one of the big clubs (though maybe soon...)

I know what they have won, at this exact moment in time though I think Chelsea are a slightly bigger draw. I don't think there is much in it to be fair.

The thread title and OP is specifically about Arsenal and Chelsea. We didn't come into it until you brought us up.

I think where we disagree is how we define a big club. If you take it solely based on where the clubs are currently then yes, Chelsea are a "bigger" club now than Arsenal. I don't apply any recency bias to the judgement. I am judging it on what the clubs have accomplished in their entirety and the size of their support.

 

[Efcjake]

Leicester are a vardy injury away from mid table.

Would you say they're a bigger club than us after winning the league? Loads would but not me.

 

[Efcjake]

Leicester is a kind of strange anomaly. I can't see them ever being that big even with success, they have a ceiling, probably because they have never really acted like a big club. City and Chelsea started to act like big clubs and it kind of stuck eventually.

They've both had the financial backing and the right timed opportunity to use it.

No other club can do what they've done now which bothers me a lot.

Leicester could have possibly done the same as Chelsea or City and kicked on if the rules over squad investment hadn't been changed from what they were when City and Chelsea invested to become successful.

Recently they have had more success than us, so would you say they're bigger than us? I see it the same as Arsenal and Chelsea. Like Arsenal we have won loads more than Leicester but people won't care about that and will say Leicester are bigger since they've won the league. Thats why I don't subscribe to that argument.

 

[Azzurri]

Would you say they're a bigger club than us after winning the league? Loads would but not me.

Definitely not. Although I was in Thailand the summer following that and saw loads of Leicester shirts (the connection with the owners I’m sure). An American lad even said to me that he supports ‘Lie-sesster’.

Wonder if there’d be quite so much support now.