Does Size Matter?

[Numpty's Dusty Ruts.]

In terms of physique of players, perhaps it does a bit - we don't appear as tiny as a squad as we once did and certainly weren't bullied by Leicester. However, this isn't about that, it's about the "we're bigger than X, but not as big as Y" stuff on the View from Leicester thread. I think too many are falling into thinking this actually matters, and what is meant by "bigger"? Does "big" mean consistent high level success (which I think it does), or is it about crowd size, history and tradition? Apart from a very few clubs who are consistently successful, and a larger number who are consistently crap, most have times when they're quite big, and times when they're smaller! Most clubs expand and contract in terms of crowd size, budget and profile, largely dependent on relative success on the field. In the past 20 years I've watched United at home in front of 8900 people, and in front of 32000, both in the second tier. I've seen us spend relatively large amounts of money and at other times (most of the time!) have relatively low spending and profile. I think "relative" is the key word. Historically we have been far more successful than Wigan or Bournemouth, but in the past 10 years they have been relatively much more successful than us. I think that "bigger" is probably about ancient history more than anything else, which is why it doesn't matter much, and plays into the hands of"massive merchants" everywhere. The ancient history has by and large favoured very old and traditional clubs (including United) with a big and local fanbase which hasn't changed that much, and which is parochial and tribal (nowt wrong wi'that!). Think Wolves, West Brom, Stoke, Villa, Derby, Forest, Leicester, Wendy (sorry) , and Blades. In terms of history, size, and good and bad times theres not a lot to choose, and perhaps we all need to stop wasting valuable drinking time going on about who's bigger than who, 'cos it really ain't that important. There, I've said it!

 

[Barney]

Messi

No

 

[ourbob]

Diego Maradona.
No

 

[Liaminho9]

Messi

No

Whole Barcelona team a few years back, around 2014, was roughly:

Valdes
Alves-Pique-Mascherano-Alba
Xavi-Fabregas-Iniesta
Sanchez-Messi-Neymar

Only Pique over 6ft.

 

[The Hobott]

You've introduced two ideas in one post ... can't ... cope.

 

[coolhandluke]

Whole Barcelona team a few years back, around 2014, was roughly:

Valdes
Alves-Pique-Mascherano-Alba
Xavi-Fabregas-Iniesta
Sanchez-Messi-Neymar

Only Pique over 6ft.

Yeah, but they were shit at corners .

 

[Dec]

Do paragraphs matter?

 

[Benny and the Blades]

No, just the boards ambition.....

Do paragraphs matter?

 

[Cerberus Blade]

It depends what you mean by "does it matter?". It matters to me that I see small town clubs with no significant past history, poorer facilities, lower crowds, less money, than us, overtake us and do better than us. Because that is a clear sign they are doing something better than us, or we are doing something worse than them, or both. And sport, by its very nature, is competitive. And the whole point of competing is to do better than others and try and win something. So yes, when I look up to the Prem and see teams like Bournemouth (is Ted McDougall still playing for them?), Burnley, Huddersfield, Swansea, etc., and then look at our recent incarceration in the third tier it makes my blood boil. These were mainly lower division teams - (I'll except Burnley because they were once top flight and I liked Ralph Coates - I loved his hairstyle - and I may except Huddersfield because I was a big fan of Frank Worthington), but somehow they've done something right, and sit looking down on us. Sorry, that's not good!

I don't deny anyone their time in the sun, but our time is long overdue. But to answer your question directly, it's similar to the answer you may get if you ask a woman "does size matter", if she's polite she'll say something like, "it's not the size it's what you do with it" - and I'm afraid that Sheffield United have been terribly flaccid for years now. Wilder is our Viagra - time to crack on and get back to the top flight then!

 

[Pinchy]

For exceptional players, no.

For the vast majority yes. Louis Reed hasn’t a prayer of making a career above Division Four.

 

[BladeInIreland]

Maybe at one time it did matter. Bigger crowds meant more income and bigger clubs attracted bigger players.

Now anybody will play for anybody if the money is right. If someone got 100k a week off port vale they would take it over 5k at real Madrid.

Investment wise, there's no need to make a bid for a more expensive team. Gate money is nothing compared to tv rights so it doesn't matter if they buy Burnley or Newcastle as they both get the same prizes. Which is the real money. Why pay 10 times as much.

 

[originaltrueblade]

Joe Shaw No

 

[Barney]

Louis Reed hasn’t a prayer of making a career above Division Four.

Something I have agreed with you on for a long while.

If you're small, you've got to have the talent to make up for it.

Unfortunately Reed doesn't quite have that.

 

[DronnieBlade]

 

[INTAKE BLADE]

14 posts in and no nob jokes

 

[Iceybabey]

Pedro, Willian and Hazard are small lads, albeit the latter having a big arse.

 

[1066blade]

If you are small, you have to be bloody good to get on in today's game.

 

[8lade]

14 posts in and no nob jokes

Post #9

 

[8lade]

A question that crops up from time to time and I've thought about this a lot, for a club of Sheffield United's potential (see I've changed it from 'size') there is only one thing that really matters:

No, just the boards ambition.....

How did I come to this conclusion? Teams that establish themselves in the Prem; West Ham (sorry for that example) West Brom, Watford, Palace, etc (I've excluded Newcastle as an example as no matter how you cut it they are 'bigger' than us) who are no bigger than us. The difference, the mindset.

 

[GreasyChipBeattie]

But to answer your question directly, it's similar to the answer you may get if you ask a woman "does size matter", if she's polite she'll say something like, "it's not the size it's what you do with it"

And, errr, where might one meet such a polite lady please?

 

[INTAKE BLADE]

Post #9

I said joke not a story

 

[BushBlade]

Yes, of course it matters. That's why Spurs are moving to a 60,000 seater stadium, why Liverpool have extended Anfield, why we have plans to enlarge the Lane. If you take away the clubs on parachute payments, ticket income still accounts for a good proportion of overall income in the championship. That's why, in general, small clubs play in the lower two divisions and big clubs play in the upper two.

http://metro.co.uk/2017/01/12/new-figures-reveals-huge-sums-arsenal-earn-from-gate-receipts-6378431/

Is getting a couple of thousand more than the clubs you're competing with important? No, not as much as running your club properly.

 

[Cerberus Blade]

And, errr, where might one meet such a polite lady please?

I met mine whilst working in a pie factory. She’d always wondered how they make those holes in the top of the pie.

 

[BladeInIreland]

Yes, of course it matters. That's why Spurs are moving to a 60,000 seater stadium, why Liverpool have extended Anfield, why we have plans to enlarge the Lane. If you take away the clubs on parachute payments, ticket income still accounts for a good proportion of overall income in the championship. That's why, in general, small clubs play in the lower two divisions and big clubs play in the upper two.

http://metro.co.uk/2017/01/12/new-figures-reveals-huge-sums-arsenal-earn-from-gate-receipts-6378431/

Is getting a couple of thousand more than the clubs you're competing with important? No, not as much as running your club properly.

I'm sure it makes a difference for the very big clubs but I don't think it does for the other 95%. I remember a few years ago an interview McCabe did, where he said our gates don't come close to covering our wage bill. Basically said it contributes little in the grand scheme of things.

 

[BushBlade]

I'm sure it makes a difference for the very big clubs but I don't think it does for the other 95%. I remember a few years ago an interview McCabe did, where he said our gates don't come close to covering our wage bill. Basically said it contributes little in the grand scheme of things.

I doubt he said that. The clubs outside the PL are even more dependent on gate money than the PL clubs. Without going through the accounts I'd estimate it's around 40% of our income. More like 75% when we were in L1.

 

[BladeInIreland]

I doubt he said that. The clubs outside the PL are even more dependent on gate money than the PL clubs. Without going through the accounts I'd estimate it's around 40% of our income. More like 75% when we were in L1.

I won't be able to find it, it was around a time he was receiving alot of flack around selling players. And fans were saying we turn up in big numbers we should have a decent budget. Always stuck with me as before I was of the same opinion as you. I thought our good gates at the time (1st or second best) would play a big role in our finances.

 

[BushBlade]

I won't be able to find it, it was around a time he was receiving alot of flack around selling players. And fans were saying we turn up in big numbers we should have a decent budget. Always stuck with me as before I was of the same opinion as you. I thought our good gates at the time (1st or second best) would play a big role in our finances.

Maybe he said it after we'd been relegated, when we had a high wage bill for a championship side and had lost £5m TV money and some of our sponsorship.
As I said, I'd guesstimate gate money to be 40% of our income in the championship so if you lose a sizeable chunk of the other 60% and can't cut the wage bill by 60% you're going to suffer. McCabe did. He had to pay the difference.