Aberdeen A Bigger Club With A Smaller Support?

[judas]

It seems this way to me. For the past 10 years our gates have been better. In recent seasons they have been 2-3k better on average.

And yet on 3 occasions now Mcinnes has nipped in and taken Hibs key targets from under our noses.

How? Are Aberdeen a more prestigious prospect than a better supported capital city club, with a better stadium and training facility?

And if it’s about money, how the **** do they have so much more of it?

This result, Aberdeen and that vain hunt Mcinnes have gotten right under my skin. I find it hard to accept these provincial muppets from a declining hole up north as a stronger entity.

Apologies. Now hit me.

[The 90+2]

They’ve investors willing to stick their money in commercially. Gears have the support like lemmings doing similar. We have a fantastic support now but we don’t believe in supporter investment.

[Stokesy's on fire]

It seems this way to me. For the past 10 years our gates have been better. In recent seasons they have been 2-3k better on average.

And yet on 3 occasions now Mcinnes has nipped in and taken Hibs key targets from under our noses.

How? Are Aberdeen a more prestigious prospect than a better supported capital city club, with a better stadium and training facility?

And if it’s about money, how the **** do they have so much more of it?

This result, Aberdeen and that vain hunt Mcinnes have gotten right under my skin. I find it hard to accept these provincial muppets from a declining hole up north as a stronger entity.

Apologies. Now hit me.

Aberdeen are not a bigger club than Hibs.

[The 90+2]

Aberdeen are not a bigger club than Hibs.

They have more money than us. Outbid us all the time. Aye they are. That’s before trophies.

[bigwheel]

Aberdeen are not a bigger club than Hibs.

I’m not really one for bigger/ smaller debates . But it’s clear they have been more successful..

Spend more money on wages and players ..

Historically have a better league record than us , cup record , European record

Yes, we perhaps have a bigger overall support ..but outside of that, they out perform us in almost every other dimension ..

[neil7908]

Not having a go at the OP per say but isn't it common knowledge that they, like our Maroon friends across the city, have themselves a Benny Factor?

Feels like this doesn't seem to sink in with some people.

[Stokesy's on fire]

They have more money than us. Outbid us all the time. Aye they are. That’s before trophies.

They got Mcrorie and they haven't even paid for him yet. The bills will start to mount up

[Stokesy's on fire]

I’m not really one for bigger/ smaller debates . But it’s clear they have been more successful..

Spend more money on wages and players ..

Historically have a better league record than us , cup record , European record

Yes, we perhaps have a bigger overall support ..but outside of that, they out perform us in almost every other dimension ..



They have one only one cup this side of the millennium.

[Just_Jimmy]

Not really been relevant since 1986.

***** club.

Sent from my Pixel 3a using Tapatalk

[CMurdoch]

Dave Cormack is a massive Aberdeen supporter and has money. He has attracted investment and I believe he would push himself to the limit financially to progress his club.

Hibs had Tom Farmer and now Ron Gordon.
The former wasn't interested in football so made sensible financial decisions for the club through Petrie and the latter will eventually look to leave with a tidy little profit by pushing up the value of the club. Another Frugal McDougall i'm afraid.

The elephant in the room for Aberdeen is their ancient stadium which has only 1 fit for purpose stand. Eventually this will be a very expensive fix which will put a large spanner in the works.
Tom Farmer & Ron Petrie have ensured we have 4.

[Steve-O]

They have one only one cup this side of the millennium.

And we’ve only two! They’ve been in Europa group stages, second in Premiership while we were still in Championship.

I really don’t care who is a “bigger club” but they’ve got extra cash from people putting it in and it’s mostly worked for them.

Definitely not easy on the eye though, that much is true

[Ozyhibby]

It seems this way to me. For the past 10 years our gates have been better. In recent seasons they have been 2-3k better on average.

And yet on 3 occasions now Mcinnes has nipped in and taken Hibs key targets from under our noses.

How? Are Aberdeen a more prestigious prospect than a better supported capital city club, with a better stadium and training facility?

And if it’s about money, how the **** do they have so much more of it?

This result, Aberdeen and that vain hunt Mcinnes have gotten right under my skin. I find it hard to accept these provincial muppets from a declining hole up north as a stronger entity.

Apologies. Now hit me.

Ambition. They repeatedly show it, we don’t.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Forza Fred]

Simples

Outside of the ugly sisters they have the biggest budget in the league.

[Since452]

Smaller club, more money

[bod]

Not having a go at the OP per say but isn't it common knowledge that they, like our Maroon friends across the city, have themselves a Benny Factor?

Feels like this doesn't seem to sink in with some people.

HSL is our benny factor ,small fry compared to the 2 you’ve mentioned

[Juniper Greens]

They make for more money from hospitality etc than us. Their profit from hospitality takings along rival our ticket sales. One look at the companies that take boxes behind their goals gives a clue. Haliburton, Baker Hughes, Texaco. Some of the largest companies by market cap in the world.
Their hospitality suite in the big stand is absolutely massive to cope with all of this.
Simply put, even before saying their chairman puts in more than ours, this already puts them ahead of us in revenue

[Since90+2]

Aberdeen are the 3rd biggest club in the country IMO.

[marinello59]

They have more money than us. Outbid us all the time. Aye they are. That’s before trophies.

They have their very own Brookes Mileson lite in charge. It will be good for a few years but when the bills finally have to be paid it’s going to hurt.

[hibbydad]

Aberdeen are the 3rd biggest club in the country IMO.
Both Bod and JuniperGreens are right they earn a lot more on hospitality and in addition HSL is very samall compared to the sheep and that crowd across the city

[bod]

Aberdeen are the 3rd biggest club in the country IMO.
Mine too

[Since452]

It's like comparing Tottenham or Arsenal to Man City. Both bigger clubs but City can blow them out the water financially. I will never say Aberdeen with their small flock of fans are a bigger club than Hibs.

[Winston Ingram]

It seems this way to me. For the past 10 years our gates have been better. In recent seasons they have been 2-3k better on average.

And yet on 3 occasions now Mcinnes has nipped in and taken Hibs key targets from under our noses.

How? Are Aberdeen a more prestigious prospect than a better supported capital city club, with a better stadium and training facility?

And if it’s about money, how the **** do they have so much more of it?

This result, Aberdeen and that vain hunt Mcinnes have gotten right under my skin. I find it hard to accept these provincial muppets from a declining hole up north as a stronger entity.

Apologies. Now hit me.

They have more money because Dave Cormack gives it to them.

[Winston Ingram]

Aberdeen are the 3rd biggest club in the country IMO.

On what basis? Cos they were successful in the early to mid 80's?

[we are hibs]

They wont be spending much when they start building their new ground which will sit half empty. Plenty Aberdeen fans unimpressed with trying to move them to the outskirts.

[Barman Stanton]

They are the only club in their City. They get all the local hospitality etc while we compete with Hearts and Murrayfield. Plus they have a benefactor pumping money in.

All we have over them is a better stadium and a slightly bigger support. And let’s be honest their honours completely blitz ours. The have won European trophies ffs. It’s hard to put up an argument for us being bigger than them.

[Barman Stanton]

On what basis? Cos they were successful in the early to mid 80's?

But by the same token, take away our famous five period and what do we have? 1 League title and a few cups. The same as Aberdeen if you took away Fergies period.

[Winston Ingram]

But by the same token, take away our famous five period and what do we have? 1 League title and a few cups. The same as Aberdeen if you took away Fergies period.

Exactly. So we're pretty much left with crowd size and we piss all over them in that context

[Barman Stanton]

Exactly. So we're pretty much left with crowd size and we piss all over them in that context

My point was more it’s absolute nonsense to try to remove any period in history to suit your own argument.

Our crowds completely blitz Monaco’s but they are a far bigger club. Other factors come other than just crowds. Aberdeen clearly make a lot more money than us in all avenues other than season tickets.

[Sammy7nil]

On what basis? Cos they were successful in the early to mid 80's?

When was the last time they were relegated, when were Hibs last I Europe in back to back seasons let alone about 8 in a row. It is just pedantic to say Aberdeen have not been better and more consistent that Hibs for decades now.

[LaMotta]

The "who is a bigger club" debate, regardless of which clubs are being compared, is a bit of a silly one because the criteria for being a "big" club is not defined anywhere and everyone bases club size on their own views of what a big club should be.

What does being a big club even mean?

[heretoday]

Dons have the whole northeast to call upon plus most of the farm animal community.

[Sammy7nil]

The "who is a bigger club" debate, regardless of which clubs are being compared, is a bit of a silly one because the criteria for being a "big" club is not defined anywhere and everyone bases club size on their own views of what a big club should be.

What does being a big club even mean?

I think it means you are a BIG club :wink:

[Winston Ingram]

When was the last time they were relegated, when were Hibs last I Europe in back to back seasons let alone about 8 in a row. It is just pedantic to say Aberdeen have not been better and more consistent that Hibs for decades now.

Have they? Since the mid 90's to McInnes and Cormacks arrival they were bang average. Under Aitken, Alex Miller, Skovdahl, McGhee, Hegarty and Brown they were poor.

They narrowly avoided relegation in 95 in the playoff. They would've have got relegated in 2000 if league reconstruction hadn't saved them. They were 11th in 2004 when there were no playoffs and finished in the bottom 6 4 years on the spin before McInnes and Cormack's cash arrived.

[Winston Ingram]

Dons have the whole northeast to call upon plus most of the farm animal community.

...and still average 3000 less fans than us.

[monarch]

Is Scotland the only country where fans get their knickers in such a twist over who‘S the third biggest club ? Which club is third biggest in England, Spain, Italy or Germany? Nobody cares.

[Winston Ingram]

Both Bod and JuniperGreens are right they earn a lot more on hospitality and in addition HSL is very samall compared to the sheep and that crowd across the city

They take more in Hospitality (https://twitter.com/SwissRamble/status/1201406623022862336?s=20)than they do in gate receipts

[Barman Stanton]

Is Scotland the only country where fans get their knickers in such a twist over who‘S the third biggest club ? Which club is third biggest in England, Spain, Italy or Germany? Nobody cares.

Nonsense, I imagine Sevilla and Valencia have these arguments all the time :)

Nah your probably right.

[Keith_M]

Nonsense, I imagine Sevilla and Valencia have these arguments all the time :)

Nah your probably right.


Oi, it's Real Betis!!!!!

:grr:

[BoomtownHibees]

Is Scotland the only country where fans get their knickers in such a twist over who‘S the third biggest club ? Which club is third biggest in England, Spain, Italy or Germany? Nobody cares.

Man Utd, A Madrid, AC Milan, Leverkusen.

Easy

[Sammy7nil]

Have they? Since the mid 90's to McInnes and Cormacks arrival they were bang average. Under Aitken, Alex Miller, Skovdahl, McGhee, Hegarty and Brown they were poor.

They narrowly avoided relegation in 95 in the playoff. They would've have got relegated in 2000 if league reconstruction hadn't saved them. They were 11th in 2004 when there were no playoffs and finished in the bottom 6 4 years on the spin before McInnes and Cormack's cash arrived.

See when they were finishing bottom six were we in the championship or below them? As I said they have been better than us for years. They are the last team to out with Celtic to take Rangers to the last day of the season the league. Pick any 15 year period from 80’s onward and I don’t think Hibs will come out on top.

[we are hibs]

Man Utd, A Madrid, AC Milan, Leverkusen.

Easy

Man united are the biggest club in England.

[BoomtownHibees]

Man united are the biggest club in England.

Lol

[Since90+2]

Lol

Man Utd are the third or fourth biggest club in the world and certainly the biggest in England.

[Sammy7nil]

Man Utd are the third or fourth biggest club in the world and certainly the biggest in England.

I don’t disagree but it all comes down to what criteria you choose to use.

[bigwheel]

Man Utd, A Madrid, AC Milan, Leverkusen.

Easy

Juventus would be biggest in Italy by some huge distance I suspect. And surely Bayern in Germany??

That said , the post you replied to is probably right - it’s our small country kindest that gets us hung up on bigger or smaller claims ...

[BoomtownHibees]

Juventus would be biggest in Italy by some huge distance I suspect. And surely Bayern in Germany??

That said , the post you replied to is probably right - it’s our small country kindest that gets us hung up on bigger or smaller claims ...

You are correct however the post was talking about 3rd biggest 😉

[BoomtownHibees]

Man Utd are the third or fourth biggest club in the world and certainly the biggest in England.

The point being, it depends what criteria people want to use when talking about who is the biggest etc

Folk usually use a criteria that gives them the result they want

[Sammy7nil]

Juventus would be biggest in Italy by some huge distance I suspect. And surely Bayern in Germany??

That said , the post you replied to is probably right - it’s our small country kindest that gets us hung up on bigger or smaller claims ...

Celtic are Scotland’s biggest club by a country mile Rangers are second again by a country mile nothing else really compares or matters in terms of size.

[LancsHibs]

Celtic are Scotland’s biggest club by a country mile Rangers are second again by a country mile nothing else really compares or matters in terms of size.

Really I always thought Rangers had more ‘fans’ in Scotland than Celtic. I know Celtic have a much bigger ground capacity so more paying punters

[Winston Ingram]

Man united are the biggest club in England.

I'm no Man U fan but this isn't even debatable.

The Deloitte list has had them in the top 3 in the World interchanging Real and Barca for as long as I can remember, which is remarkable considering they've been bang average since Alex Ferguson left.

[Since90+2]

Really I always thought Rangers had more ‘fans’ in Scotland than Celtic. I know Celtic have a much bigger ground capacity so more paying punters

I'm not sure how you can accurately judge the size of Rangers v Celtic supports. In Scotland it's possible Rangers have more fans but as a worldwide brand then Celtic are much larger IMO.

[Keith_M]

I'm not sure how you can accurately judge the size of Rangers v Celtic supports. In Scotland it's possible Rangers have more fans but as a worldwide brand then Celtic are much larger IMO.


Sounds a bit strange but shirt sales are a decent indicator.

I remember a few years back they released new shirts at the exact same time (before it was a yearly change of shirt, like it is now) and sold 200,000 worldwide within six months.

That's quite massive but suggested there was roughly the same interest in both clubs.

Currently, the only reason Celtc seem bigger (IMO) is because they have a larger stadium. If The Rangers had a 60k capacity stadium, they'd probably sell it out every week as well.

[bigwheel]

You are correct however the post was talking about 3rd biggest [emoji6]

Oops [emoji120][emoji106]

[bigwheel]

Sounds a bit strange but shirt sales are a decent indicator.

I remember a few years back they released new shirts at the exact same time (before it was a yearly change of shirt, like it is now) and sold 200,000 worldwide within six months.

That's quite massive but suggested there was roughly the same interest in both clubs.

Currently, the only reason Celtc seem bigger (IMO) is because they have a larger stadium. If The Rangers had a 60k capacity stadium, they'd probably sell it out every week as well.

I’d say, particularly with the Irish diaspora, Celtic’s supporter base is bigger . Rangers are huge in Scottish terms but don’t have as big a global reach. Fairly sizeable yet niche unionist/ Protestant global following I suspect.

Their respective marketing databases would be a helpful key indicator .

As a rough (far from scientific) guide: Twitter has Rangers at just under 600k followers and Celtic significantly higher at just under 700k.

We are at 85k compared to Aberdeen 105k (surprisingly high) and Hearts at 90k.

All the others are less in the spfl. Dundee United the nearest at around 56k..

[Sammy7nil]

Really I always thought Rangers had more ‘fans’ in Scotland than Celtic. I know Celtic have a much bigger ground capacity so more paying punters

So is the only criteria fan base within Scotland? In the last I don’t know how many years Celtic have dominated Scottish football In trophy wins and financially.

[snedzuk]

Mentality - speaking in August 19 after a 0-0 with Killie, heres Derek McInnes.

McInnes was left frustrated as the misfiring Reds were held to a 0-0 stalemate at Kilmarnock. McInnes warned his players need to quickly learn that drawing is not good enough for the Dons
McInnes said: “I spoke to the players after the game. Whether they have been here for a while, whether they are players I have given contracts to or players that have just arrived, we have always prided ourselves on having a type of Old Firm mentality home and away in that we set out to win every game."
“If any of the players are pleased with themselves going back with a 0-0 and thinking that is not the worst result, maybe that would have been a good result for their previous clubs but a draw feels like a defeat for Aberdeen – and so it should."

“Wherever players have come from, 0-0 isn’t an acceptable performance or result. We need to do more to win games. For the new players who have come in they need to get equipped."
“And for the players who have been here for a while need to be equipped to win more games. That was not a good point for us and we need to grasp that sooner than later.”

[Winston Ingram]

I’d say, particularly with the Irish diaspora, Celtic’s supporter base is bigger . Rangers are huge in Scottish terms but don’t have as big a global reach. Fairly sizeable yet niche unionist/ Protestant global following I suspect.

Their respective marketing databases would be a helpful key indicator .

As a rough (far from scientific) guide: Twitter has Rangers at just under 600k followers and Celtic significantly higher at just under 700k.

We are at 85k compared to Aberdeen 105k (surprisingly high) and Hearts at 90k.

All the others are less in the spfl. Dundee United the nearest at around 56k..

Scottish and Irish Diaspora is huge.

It really annoys me when the Weegia discuss Celtic being this global brand like Man United and Real Madrid.

Man U/Real's global fanbase is made up of people who have little or no connection to the football club. They watch the Premier League/La Liga and decide that they like them. Celtic's 'global' fanbase is pretty much made up of Irish/Scots emigrants

[Brightside]

Aberdeen are not a bigger club than Hibs.

Yes they are.

[bigwheel]

Scottish and Irish Diaspora is huge.

It really annoys me when the Weegia discuss Celtic being this global brand like Man United and Real Madrid.

Man U/Real's global fanbase is made up of people who have little or no connection to the football club. They watch the Premier League/La Liga and decide that they like them. Celtic's 'global' fanbase is pretty much made up of Irish/Scots emigrants

Yes. Including second and third generation immigrants ..

What Celtic have done better than any Scottish club is the creation of a “global celts” network . Organised and structured focussed building and engaging a connected network of Celtic fans across the globe . They also use this network on big topics . For example recently when they wanted to create an improvement of the digital experience for fans who couldn’t get to the games, this community build the strategy and also secured some funding as a contribution to improving their “digital stadium”..

Pretty impressive tbh

[Winston Ingram]

Yes they are.

Does anyone have a reason to back this up or just people saying that they are?

[Since452]

The day I have an inferiority complex about a club that has a higher average attendance of seagulls than fans over my lifetime is when I jack it in and start supporting someone else.

They've won two league cups in 30 years which is even more pittiful than ourselves and Hearts. It's bloody Aberdeen not Celtic.

Hibs, Hearts and Aberdeen fans arguing over who is the biggest club is like three bald men arguing over a comb.

[Antifa Hibs]

How do Hibs and Aberdeen's home supports compare?

Obliviously our average is higher but we do get more away fans.

At Easter Road we'll get:

Celtic - 3900
Rangers - 3900
Hearts - 3900 (plus a home sellout which aberdeen won't get for no local derby)
Aberdeen - 1900

Aberdeen get:

Celtic - 1650
Rangers - 1650
Hearts - 600 - 1500
Hibs - 600 - 1500

If its twice a season thats a decent amount of away fans bumping our average up. I'd also think Killie, St Mirren, Motherwell's etc who would take 500 to Easter Road will take 200-300 to Aberdeen due to distance involved, dearer tickets, no students and worse away area.

PS the team that's had the most domestic trophies and european success is the 3rd biggest out of us, sheep and hertz. So its aberdeen. Not that it matters a jot.

[Brightside]

Does anyone have a reason to back this up or just people saying that they are?

Current rankings. https://footballdatabase.com/ranking/scotland/1

On honours they are above us too.
Finances too.

We have a bigger fan base but it hasn't made much difference in the last 10 years.

[Since452]

We wouldn't have had this thread if Boyle had punted the ball into the stand

[bigwheel]

We wouldn't have had this thread if Boyle had punted the ball into the stand

Ha! So true :-)

[DH1875]

Sounds a bit strange but shirt sales are a decent indicator.

I remember a few years back they released new shirts at the exact same time (before it was a yearly change of shirt, like it is now) and sold 200,000 worldwide within six months.

That's quite massive but suggested there was roughly the same interest in both clubs.

Currently, the only reason Celtc seem bigger (IMO) is because they have a larger stadium. If The Rangers had a 60k capacity stadium, they'd probably sell it out every week as well.

Only because of this whole 10 in a row thing.
Rangers are bigger within Scotland/the UK but globally Celtic are a lot bigger. I'm not just talking expat communities or places like America, Australia or Canada. For some reason their are French, Spanish, Chinese people who like Celtic. Not sure the same can be said about rangers, not to the same scale anyway.

[ScottB]

‘Big’ is a largely irrelevant, and hard to define way to compare clubs.

What’s your budget and what did you achieve with it is a lot easier to quantify.

Aberdeen have likely been running consistently the third or fourth biggest budget in Scottish football over the last decade. They have consistently finished 2nd or 3rd for most of that. I’d say they’ve underperformed overall, failing in the cup competitions, but there you go.

Hibs are more likely 5th in that budget league. We’ve spent 3 seasons in that timeframe in the Championship, a few more in the bottom 6 and a couple in the top 6. Therefore we’ve underperformed in the league overall, though arguably overperformed in the cups, reaching a number of finals and winning the SC.

Have Aberdeen been more successful in the last 10 years relatively speaking in terms of money spent? I’d say yes. How big their stadium is or how many fans turn up doesn’t really mean anything for me, it comes down to who wins more games, and they’ve done a better job of that, consistently.

[EI255]

They have people who are willing to help the club on the football front, unfortunately more help than our club get. It's called real ambition.

Sent from my LG-H870 using Tapatalk

[Winston Ingram]

Current rankings. https://footballdatabase.com/ranking/scotland/1

On honours they are above us too.
Finances too.

We have a bigger fan base but it hasn't made much difference in the last 10 years.

Thanks for that. I’m not convinced that website is really measuring size. It has Hamilton being bigger than Dundee and Livingston above Hearts. It depends on how you look at it all I suppose.

To me it’s always been fan base. It’s the biggest trigger for clubs growth. Trophies are a bit more subjective. Nottingham Forest for example have won the European Cup twice. I’m not even sure if if they could even be considered in the top 20 clubs in England.

[Toldo123]

Have they? Since the mid 90's to McInnes and Cormacks arrival they were bang average. Under Aitken, Alex Miller, Skovdahl, McGhee, Hegarty and Brown they were poor.

They narrowly avoided relegation in 95 in the playoff. They would've have got relegated in 2000 if league reconstruction hadn't saved them. They were 11th in 2004 when there were no playoffs and finished in the bottom 6 4 years on the spin before McInnes and Cormack's cash arrived.Aye but still not relegated

Sent from my F5321 using Tapatalk

[Since452]

Aye but still not relegated

Sent from my F5321 using Tapatalk

Through default

[lucky]

Size of a club is usually based on the size of their support. If a billionaire bought Alloa and they bought lots of top class players won everything but played in front of 2000 fans would anyone regard them as a big club?

[Keith_M]

Size of a club is usually based on the size of their support. If a billionaire bought Alloa and they bought lots of top class players won everything but played in front of 2000 fans would anyone regard them as a big club?


Yes.

[Winston Ingram]

Aye but still not relegated

Sent from my F5321 using Tapatalk

We wouldn’t have been relegated if they restructured the league half way through the season either.

[Toldo123]

We wouldn’t have been relegated if they restructured the league half way through the season either.Both times

Sent from my F5321 using Tapatalk

[gillythehibby]

Yes.

FFS get real

[jgl07]

Man Utd are the third or fourth biggest club in the world and certainly the biggest in England.

Manchester United were the third or fourth biggest club in the world and certainly the biggest in England.

About ten years ago!

[Since90+2]

Size of a club is usually based on the size of their support. If a billionaire bought Alloa and they bought lots of top class players won everything but played in front of 2000 fans would anyone regard them as a big club?

Tottenham likely have a bigger support than Man City, Arsenal too but I'd argue that neither are bigger clubs these days than Manchester City.

[Since452]

Only right that now Hearts are away and playing in the diddy leagues we find another similar sized club to feel inferior to. It's the Hibs way.

[Winston Ingram]

Tottenham likely have a bigger support than Man City, Arsenal too but I'd argue that neither are bigger clubs these days than Manchester City.

This is true domestically but maybe not globally. City’s success has attracted more foreign followers. Same could be said of Chelsea. There’s no doubt Spurs/Arsenal havee a bigger domestic support. It’s still quite easy to get a ticket at Stamford Bridge despite having a significantly smaller ground.

[Heisenberg]

We’ve won more than them over the last 20 years. They aren’t some gigantic club. They’ve had continuity in their management team and have built a good squad over the last few years. Hopefully Jack Ross can do the same with us.

[mcohibs]

Manchester United were the third or fourth biggest club in the world and certainly the biggest in England.

About ten years ago!

Manchester United are still the biggest club in England. Followed by Liverpool then Arsenal

[Since90+2]

Only right that now Hearts are away and playing in the diddy leagues we find another similar sized club to feel inferior to. It's the Hibs way.

The only time the word inferior has been used on this thread is by yourself, twice.

Rangers for example are an absolutely massive club compared to Hibs but that doesn't mean we are inferior in anyway.

[Sammy7nil]

Size of a club is usually based on the size of their support. If a billionaire bought Alloa and they bought lots of top class players won everything but played in front of 2000 fans would anyone regard them as a big club?

Yes look at Monaco


We’ve won more than them over the last 20 years. They aren’t some gigantic club. They’ve had continuity in their management team and have built a good squad over the last few years. Hopefully Jack Ross can do the same with us.

I agree they are not a gigantic club but they have consistently been above us in the league for nearly 30 years. The seem to out bid us for this players time after time there is not a huge difference in crowds therefore imho they are the bigger club. But has been said before bald men fighting over a comb.

They only real issue they seem able to attract better quality players.

[Bronson]

Have aberdeen more consistent than us over the last 8 years? Yes.
Do they have a better team than us? Probably.
A bigger club? Don’t make me laugh.

[lucky]

For me some are getting mixed up with a big club and a rich club and successful club. Man City were a big club before the cash injection but they still remain a smaller club than United. If it all about cash and paying for players then Bournemouth are bigger than Celtic or Rangers. It’s clearly not. The size of the club is subjective but big clubs have big fan bases. Rangers have not won the league in 9 years but remain a massive club world wide. Winning cups and titles does not make clubs big it makes them successful

[scuttle]

Have aberdeen more consistent than us over the last 8 years? Yes.
Do they have a better team than us? Probably.
A bigger club? Don’t make me laugh.

The average population of Aberdeen is 233,000 approx ,the average of Edinburgh is 450,000 approx. Considering Aberdenn has one team compared to Edinburghs two it probably works out that Hibs ,Hearts and Aberdeen are all similar in size [forgot Hertz have 400,000 fans]. Have to admire their away support though considering they have to travel at least 2 hours to every away game apart from Dundee. Its all down to recruitment IMO and they have been clearly offering better contracts than us as Aberdeen is a dump compared to Edinburgh

[Stokesy's on fire]

The average population of Aberdeen is 233,000 approx ,the average of Edinburgh is 450,000 approx. Considering Aberdenn has one team compared to Edinburghs two it probably works out that Hibs ,Hearts and Aberdeen are all similar in size [forgot Hertz have 400,000 fans]. Have to admire their away support though considering they have to travel at least 2 hours to every away game apart from Dundee. Its all down to recruitment IMO and they have been clearly offering better contracts than us as Aberdeen is a dump compared to Edinburgh


Don't forget Aberdeenshire

[Since90+2]

Have aberdeen more consistent than us over the last 8 years? Yes.
Do they have a better team than us? Probably.
A bigger club? Don’t make me laugh.

They won the league far more recently than us, they've won more Scottish cups than us, they've won more League cups than us, overall Scottish League table they are above us and they have won 2 European trophies.

If the roles were reversed we'd be laughing at a club trying to claim they are bigger.

[LancsHibs]

Size of a club is usually based on the size of their support. If a billionaire bought Alloa and they bought lots of top class players won everything but played in front of 2000 fans would anyone regard them as a big club?

I give you Manchester City, admittedly on a different scale than your Alloa example but the same principle. Mega rich foreigners buy poorly performing English club with decent but not exceptional fan base and just throw ridiculous amounts of $$ at it. Now MCFC are regarded as a big club, there is now a whole generation of kids who just don’t realise how poor and mediocre Man City were, the whole prospective of the club has changed. Easily done with endless funds.

[Juniper Greens]

Tin hat on. But I think Aberdeen have more fans than us. Making them (in my own opinion) a bigger club. They have the whole north east to themselves (population c500k). There are also fewer Celtic fans up there and slightly fewer rangers fans, so they lose less to them too.
Aberdeen have quite a high number of fans who don't live in the north east. At university and throughout working life, I was surprised by the number of Aberdeen fans down here and in Glasgow. I think this goes some way to explaining their large "travelling" support.
What they have is fewer fans who go week in week out. But if we were to treat "club" in the traditional sense of counting the number of people who feel they belong to it, then I think Aberdeen are maybe 10-20% bigger than Hibs and Hearts, who are much of a muchness. Celtic and rangers are however so large in comparison, that in general terms, we can be seen as a second tier of size, with hearts and Aberdeen. There is then a big gap down to the Dundee clubs in tier 3

[Renfrew_Hibby]

I give you Manchester City, admittedly on a different scale than your Alloa example but the same principle. Mega rich foreigners buy poorly performing English club with decent but not exceptional fan base and just throw ridiculous amounts of $$ at it. Now MCFC are regarded as a big club, there is now a whole generation of kids who just don’t realise how poor and mediocre Man City were, the whole prospective of the club has changed. Easily done with endless funds.

Get what you are saying and I have no affinity with any English club but City have always been a big club, Everton too.
Liverpool were a smallish mediocre side, akin to say Birmingham City until the early sixties, Man Utd only took over from City due to the brilliance of Busby and the Munich Air crash giving United a back story and global sympathy and interest.
Point is most clubs have been mediocre at various points in history. Right now Man City are a global brand and £s determine size these days.

[green&left]

Don't forget Aberdeenshire

Surely you can say the same about greater Edinburgh?

[Stokesy's on fire]

Surely you can say the same about greater Edinburgh?


Aberdeen city and the shire is around about 500,000 population and Aberdeen are the only football team located within a very vast area. The support they get is utterly abysmal considering they are the only show in the town and shire and to some extent Moray. Let’s be honest Aberdeen and Hearts share the whole delusions of grandeur mentality.

[Keith_M]

Don't forget Aberdeenshire


Don't forget Lothian and the Borders.



;-)



-----------


Edinburgh (535,000)
West Lothian (182,000)
Midlothian (91,000)
East Lothian (105,000)
The Borders (115,000).


If you discount half (being generous here) of the borders for QoS and Berwick Rangers, then discount about a third (even more generous) of West Lothian for Livi, that makes about 900,000.

[Sammy7nil]

Don't forget Lothian and the Borders.



;-)



-----------


Edinburgh (535,000)
West Lothian (182,000)
Midlothian (91,000)
East Lothian (105,000)
The Borders (115,000).


If you discount half (being generous here) of the borders for Dumfries and Berwick Rangers, then discount about a third (even more generous) of West Lothian for Livi, that makes about 900,000.

Don’t forget Livingston and all the other BIG teams in that catchment area :wink:

[Keith_M]

Don’t forget Livingston and all the other BIG teams in that catchment area :wink:


I didn't... that's why I mentioned it at the bottom of my post


:wink:

[Hibernia&Alba]

In terms of support base, I've always thought of Hibs, Hearts and Aberdeen as similar, Aberdeen having the advantage of being a one club city but with a smaller population. Aberdeen have more money to spend than we have just now and can outbid us for players. I think the three clubs are interchangeable in terms of which is 'biggest', dependent upon which is doing best at any given time. Of course the big two in Glasgow are on a different level.

[Keith_M]

In terms of support base, I've always thought of Hibs, Hearts and Aberdeen as similar, Aberdeen having the advantage of being a one club city but with a smaller population. Aberdeen have more money to spend than we have just now and can outbid us for players. I think the three clubs are interchangeable in terms of which is 'biggest', dependent upon which is doing best at any given time. Of course the big two in Glasgow are on a different level.


I agree, I don't think there's a massive difference in the level of support.


If I'm being honest, though, I'd have to say that Hibs have generally had the lowest attendances out of the three clubs over the forty or so years I've been going to games. That's obviously changed in the last few years.

[Bronson]

They won the league far more recently than us, they've won more Scottish cups than us, they've won more League cups than us, overall Scottish League table they are above us and they have won 2 European trophies.

If the roles were reversed we'd be laughing at a club trying to claim they are bigger.

The size of a club is primarily determined by fanbase for me. You’ll never convince me that man city are a bigger club than newcastle despite their trophy cabinet being fuller.

[Since90+2]

The size of a club is primarily determined by fanbase for me. You’ll never convince me that man city are a bigger club than newcastle despite their trophy cabinet being fuller.

So by your criteria Celtic and Rangers are the biggest clubs in Britain outwith Liverpool and Man Utd?

[Since90+2]

The size of a club is primarily determined by fanbase for me. You’ll never convince me that man city are a bigger club than newcastle despite their trophy cabinet being fuller.

Do we historically have a bigger average attendance than Aberdeen? I know we have over the last couple of years but I'm not sure we have if you are looking over a longer period of say 20 years.

I'd say they have a larger away support than we do. All things considered the size of Hibs and Aberdeen's support is probably about the same but unfortunately in terms of honours they beat us on almost every single measurement.

[Keith_M]

Do we historically have a bigger average attendance than Aberdeen? I know we have over the last couple of years but I'm not sure we have if you are looking over a longer period of say 20 years.

I'd say they have a larger away support than we do. All things considered the size of Hibs and Aberdeen's support is probably about the same but unfortunately in terms of honours they beat us on almost every single measurement.


They had much better attendances in the 80s and 90s. Since 2000, it's been pretty much the same.

[Bronson]

So by your criteria Celtic and Rangers are the biggest clubs in Britain outwith Liverpool and Man Utd?

Without a doubt. Who’s bigger?

We might not like them but they are huge, huge clubs.

[Since90+2]

Without a doubt. Who’s bigger?

We might not like them but they are huge, huge clubs.

Arsenal, Chelsea and Manchester City are all bigger clubs than Celtic and Rangers by absolute miles.

You could make a case for Tottenham too.

[Bronson]

Arsenal, Chelsea and Manchester City are all bigger clubs than Celtic and Rangers by absolute miles.

You could make a case for Tottenham too.

Not even close. Seriously, man city is a horrendous shout.

I can only assume we are basing this on totally different criteria. Rangers have 40k STs with 15k on a waiting list, celtic over 50k STs. Both could sell out their grounds 5x over for an old firm, and that’s without any tourists padding the attendance stats like the tourist league down south.

If the old firm had the resources these english clubs have, they would absolutely dwarf the likes of man city.

[Hibernia&Alba]

Arsenal, Chelsea and Manchester City are all bigger clubs than Celtic and Rangers by absolute miles.

You could make a case for Tottenham too.

I don't think so. Arsenal, just perhaps, but both the Old Firm are bigger clubs than Man City, Chelsea and Spurs.

[Billy Whizz]

McInnes was on Sportsound tonight, basically saying McRorie joined Aberdeen for football reasons, and they didn’t offer him a penny more than Hibs
If this is the case, you can’t blame Hibs, McInnes obviously did a great selling job on signing for the Dons to him

[Keith_M]

McInnes was on Sportsound tonight, basically saying McRorie joined Aberdeen for football reasons...


He's obviously a big fan of Catenaccio

[Winston Ingram]

I don't think so. Arsenal, just perhaps, but both the Old Firm are bigger clubs than Man City, Chelsea and Spurs.

This is the thing. The global fan base of those clubs listed are likely bigger.

As discussed earlier in the thread, Celtic’s ‘global’ following is made up of Scottish/Irish diaspora.

The others gather their fan base watching them in the premier league.

[LaMotta]

Here is some criteria for defining club size when Betway carried out a survey last year:


23939

https://www.google.com/amp/s/blog.betway.com/football/what-makes-a-big-club-we-reveal-the-results-of-our-survey/amp/

[DH1875]

Arsenal, Chelsea and Manchester City are all bigger clubs than Celtic and Rangers by absolute miles.

You could make a case for Tottenham too.

Disagree. Sometimes you need to take the blinkers off. Celtic and rangers are massive and are bigger than city, Chelsea and spurs.

[bigwheel]

Disagree. Sometimes you need to take the blinkers off. Celtic and rangers are massive and are bigger than city, Chelsea and spurs.

City have 8.3M twitter followers , Celtic have 800k, Spurs 4.6m. I’d say that The draw of the EPL takes these teams into a global scale that is a different level from anything you here

[DH1875]

This is the thing. The global fan base of those clubs listed are likely bigger.

As discussed earlier in the thread, Celtic’s ‘global’ following is made up of Scottish/Irish diaspora.

The others gather their fan base watching them in the premier league.

Not true. While it's a large percentage Celtic have fans in Europe and Asia who aren't from scots/Irish heritage.

[Bronson]

City have 8.3M twitter followers , Celtic have 800k, Spurs 4.6m. I’d say that The draw of the EPL takes these teams into a global scale that is a different level from anything you here

Bournemouth have 531k twitter followers, hibs have 87k. Are you going to tell me bournemouth are bigger than hibs? Game’s a bogey if social media followers are a measure of club size.

[bigwheel]

Bournemouth have 531k twitter followers, hibs have 87k. Are you going to tell me bournemouth are bigger than hibs? Game’s a bogey if social media followers are a measure of club size.

It’s just an indicator isn’t it..being in the EPL would have grown the global interest in them a lot

[LaMotta]

Bournemouth have 531k twitter followers, hibs have 87k. Are you going to tell me bournemouth are bigger than hibs? Game’s a bogey if social media followers are a measure of club size.

Hibs have more social media followers than Hearts so I'd say yes :greengrin

[Winston Ingram]

Not true. While it's a large percentage Celtic have fans in Europe and Asia who aren't from scots/Irish heritage.

You know this how? The PL is everywhere. Do you think millions of people in these countries just decide to randomly pick Celtic out of one of the smaller professional leagues in world football and say I’m following them?

[Since452]

Aberdeen have a much larger seagull following than Hibs I'll give them that

[scuttle]

Aberdeen have a much larger seagull following than Hibs I'll give them that

Flock off no chance

[Keith_M]

When you say that Aberdeen have a much smaller support, are you referring to the average height of their fans?


:dunno:

[DH1875]

You know this how? The PL is everywhere. Do you think millions of people in these countries just decide to randomly pick Celtic out of one of the smaller professional leagues in world football and say I’m following them?

From living in Europe and having Spanish family and having friends from Germany, Italy and Spain. Also very randomly Celtic get groups of Asian tourists turning up at most of their home games.

[DH1875]

City have 8.3M twitter followers , Celtic have 800k, Spurs 4.6m. I’d say that The draw of the EPL takes these teams into a global scale that is a different level from anything you here

Put rangers and celtic into the EPL and they'd become monsters. They'd be right up there with the biggest clubs in the world. Kit, put Hibs in the EPL and we would be bigger than at least half the teams in it.
There's a reason the EPL don't want anything to do with celtic or rangers and it's nothing to do with bigotry. Within 5/10 years, they'd be winning it.

[Since90+2]

Put rangers and celtic into the EPL and they'd become monsters. They'd be right up there with the biggest clubs in the world. Kit, put Hibs in the EPL and we would be bigger than at least half the teams in it.
There's a reason the EPL don't want anything to do with celtic or rangers and it's nothing to do with bigotry. Within 5/10 years, they'd be winning it.

Liverpool, who are a bigger club than Celtic & Rangers, hadnt won the title for 30 years before this season so I don't see how you can say within 5-10 years Celtic & Rangers would be winning it.

[DH1875]

Liverpool, who are a bigger club than Celtic & Rangers, hadnt won the title for 30 years before this season so I don't see how you can say within 5-10 years Celtic & Rangers would be winning it.

OK you can't guarantee anything but they would 100% be challenging for it within 10 years.

[Keith_M]

Borussia Dortmund have had the highest average attendances in Germany for quite a few years. Does that mean they're the biggest club in Germany?


Actually, if Celtc moved to the Bundesliga, would they become the biggest club in Germany? I mean, it's obvious there's a massive Irish Diaspora there as well, cos there's an Irish Pub in every single town and village.


Come to think of it, if Aberdeen moved to New Zealand, they'd be the biggest club in the world. After all, there's ten times as many sheep as there are people over there....

[vercol36]

I would agree with the idea that the 'size' of a club is in no way related to league and cup success. You could have a club supported by 5 million people, who have never one a thing, and they would still be a huge club. Look at the Toronto Maple Leafs - one of the biggest sports clubs in the world (not just in the hockey world), but have won diddly squat since the 50s.

It's down to fan numbers and, though I have a suspicion that Hibs have more fans than Aberdeen, it would be incredibly difficult to prove one way or the other.

[bigwheel]

Put rangers and celtic into the EPL and they'd become monsters. They'd be right up there with the biggest clubs in the world. Kit, put Hibs in the EPL and we would be bigger than at least half the teams in it.
There's a reason the EPL don't want anything to do with celtic or rangers and it's nothing to do with bigotry. Within 5/10 years, they'd be winning it.

I’d agree with that ..before then though. They remain with their own demographic

[Since452]

Liverpool, who are a bigger club than Celtic & Rangers, hadnt won the title for 30 years before this season so I don't see how you can say within 5-10 years Celtic & Rangers would be winning it.

Everyone has a different opinion but I feel the only English club bigger than Celtic and Rangers are Manchester United. Hate saying it but those two clubs are gigantic and with money would be formidable regardless of the league they play in. Look at PSG.

[Since90+2]

Everyone has a different opinion but I feel the only English club bigger than Celtic and Rangers are Manchester United. Hate saying it but those two clubs are gigantic and with money would be formidable regardless of the league they play in. Look at PSG.

Liverpool are a bigger club than Celtic and Rangers by some distance. It's not even close.

They've won 6 Champions Leagues and have literally millions and millions of fans worldwide. They were valued recently at £2 billion pound.

[bigwheel]

Everyone has a different opinion but I feel the only English club bigger than Celtic and Rangers are Manchester United. Hate saying it but those two clubs are gigantic and with money would be formidable regardless of the league they play in. Look at PSG.

Rangers are globally a smaller club than even Celtic. in Scotland only they are similar ..but beyond Scotland they are much smaller reach than Celtic. I’d say that neither are anywhere near the top 8-10 clubs in England . Would change of course if they were in the same league

Rangers got a shock a few years ago when they tried an “introduce a friend to us” to increase their database of fans. They were aiming for 100000 additions . They got 3K. At board level it hit them that their target population was much more niche than they had imagined.

[The Modfather]

Put rangers and celtic into the EPL and they'd become monsters. They'd be right up there with the biggest clubs in the world. Kit, put Hibs in the EPL and we would be bigger than at least half the teams in it.
There's a reason the EPL don't want anything to do with celtic or rangers and it's nothing to do with bigotry. Within 5/10 years, they'd be winning it.

Short to mid term they might ride the crest of the wave of being competitive in the premiership. However long term their appeal might drop once the novelty wears off. How many new generations would they gain when they’re not winning trophies every season and just one club in a pack of clubs. What’s to stop those generations supporting Liverpool or Man City, or whoever is dominant at the time, instead?

I think they’d eventually find their level on par with Tottenham or Arsenal. Mainly competing for the top 4, with the odd cup win once in a while.

[Bronson]

Rangers are globally a smaller club than even Celtic. in Scotland only they are similar ..but beyond Scotland they are much smaller reach than Celtic. I’d say that neither are anywhere near the top 8-10 clubs in England . Would change of course if they were in the same league

Rangers got a shock a few years ago when they tried an “introduce a friend to us” to increase their database of fans. They were aiming for 100000 additions . They got 3K. At board level it hit them that their target population was much more niche than they had imagined.

I don’t really buy into this ‘global fanbase’ thing. Anyone can watch a team on tv in another continent and say they support them but when I say fanbase I mean people who go to games.

Rangers took around 10k fans to a friendly away to sheffield wednesday a couple years ago, how many thousands did they take to the shan wee grounds in the lower leagues?

Celtic took a similar number to brentford in 2013 for a friendly.

Find me 8-10 clubs in england who can do that when clubs like man city don’t even sell out every CL game. You can’t.

[ancient hibee]

Fans attending games don't matter in the EPL.

[mjhibby]

The team with the biggest fan base isn’t always the one that achieves the highest positions. Hamilton regularly over achieve and clubs like our neighbours and others underachieve. Aberdeen have been able to over the last few years grind out results where we let go nine leads last season. Remember for all their extra investment they still finished behind Motherwell last season. We are trying to build a team and are still a couple of players short to compete regularly for third imho. Give Ross time to get it sorted. Btw for all their so called investment one trophy this century. Mmmm. As for the game at the weekend it was just the wrong game for Nisbet and Gogic to be missing. ******* happens

[DH1875]

You know this how? The PL is everywhere. Do you think millions of people in these countries just decide to randomly pick Celtic out of one of the smaller professional leagues in world football and say I’m following them?

When we hear of tv deals here it's usually just our crappy sky or BT one. Don't think people realise that Scottish football is shown/has tv deals in something like 120 countries. Celtic and rangers games are shown all over the world including their home games and 3 o'clock kick offs.
120 countries, not bad for one of the so called smallest professional leagues in world football.

[Since452]

Rangers are globally a smaller club than even Celtic. in Scotland only they are similar ..but beyond Scotland they are much smaller reach than Celtic. I’d say that neither are anywhere near the top 8-10 clubs in England . Would change of course if they were in the same league

Rangers got a shock a few years ago when they tried an “introduce a friend to us” to increase their database of fans. They were aiming for 100000 additions . They got 3K. At board level it hit them that their target population was much more niche than they had imagined.

I hear what you're saying but can't think of many clubs that would take 250,000 to a UEFA cup final just to watch on a big screen. Quarter of a million folk. Made a **** of themselves but still incredible numbers.

[tamig]

The "who is a bigger club" debate, regardless of which clubs are being compared, is a bit of a silly one because the criteria for being a "big" club is not defined anywhere and everyone bases club size on their own views of what a big club should be.

What does being a big club even mean?

The whole thing is all very hertzish and gives me the boak.