Lots of people complain that Tottenham are considered in the “big 6” so if they weren’t in the big 6 who would replace them

  • Revolutionary-Ad5526@alien.topBEnglish
    1·
    10 months ago

    they are top 6.

    ​

    Leicester made a run for a few years but have faded. Everton felt like they were close for awhile and have consistency the last 20 years

    • jedaga@alien.topBEnglish
      1·
      10 months ago

      Newcastle, Everton, and Villa all have history. Unlike some clubs ;)

  • jedaga@alien.topBEnglish
    1·
    10 months ago

    It’s actually the big 7:

    Liverpool Man United Arsenal Tottenham Aston Villa Everton Newcastle

  • ZaphodG@alien.topBEnglish
    1·
    10 months ago

    Spurs are #5 when ranked by revenue. Gunners at #6 are more questionable. Nobody is questioning Arsenal as a big 6 club, are they? And of the top 6 can out-spend all but a very few European clubs.

  • Notanothrshitthrow@alien.topBEnglish
    1·
    10 months ago

    Just do away with the “Big 6” discussion all together. It’s a ridiculous Sky Sports invention aimed to justify uneven media coverage.

    I see people justifying it as a legitimate classification because of finances…is that really the sporting discussion we want? “These clubs make the most amount of money ergo they deserve the most amount of interest”?

  • STILETT0_exists@alien.topBEnglish
    1·
    10 months ago

    Spurs have shown time and again that they deserve to be in the top 6 by consistentky finishing in the top 6. Sure they have their dips, everyone does. But that doesn’t mean that they don’t have a massive revenue stream and brand that keeps them there. The closest teams in terms of reputation are Everton and Aston Villa and these teams still are massively sidelined in the media so Spurs is still top 6 no matter how good they are at bottling