What is more Challenging: a Major or a Minor Team?

I've been mostly drawn to playing with struggling teams, but am now tempted to try a really big one (Barcelona FC).

What is the experience of running a major global team versus a minor local one?... Is it more difficult or easier?... Which one do you prefer, and why?... Thanks.

it would be easier because not only do you have more money but you have the reputation to bring in big players. I usually play a big team as well as a couple of small teams on different saves. I can't really say which would be more fun except that a small team is more fun for a long save, but if you've never tried a big team i would recommend giving it a go it can be really fun.

There is a lot more expectation with a big team. With a small team you can get away with bad results, but not with a big club.

Big team - You get to have your favourite world-class players and you get to buy those that you don't have. Game ends after a few season after you lose excitement as you conquer all.

Small team - You get lesser players but you have to wheel and deal to get transfer revenue, build your own team with own signings and promising youngsters. Bringing them to promotion takes seasons, so there's a target every season. On reaching the top tier, you aim for Europe domination. All these takes many seasons but you enjoy more.

John, the game only gets boring with a big team if you get bored of success. Personally I love winning all the time.

The problem is that once you win lots of things then you realise the only way is down

id say the big team is harder to manage. you have a lot clearer goals (so to speak) and a lot clearer ideas of who you should be beating, and how many goals you should be scoring against certain teams. llm takes a lot of that pressure off (imho). i spend my FM career alternating between managing Liverpool, and llm, and i ALWAYS find the llm games are more rewarding, more successful, and more likely to last more than 3 or 4 seasons. too easy to get bored as liverpool as all players are accessible, all nations are, everything is.... nothing like workin your way up to the top, THEN winning everything......

I like middle teams the best. Right now I'm managing West Brom, good mixture of great and bad.

You want challenge - goto CSE forum, and do the Dafuge or Gundo's challenge. They are both awesome.

When I get the new game I always start as Manchester United and play a save with them, but once thats over with I choose a lower team or try a career with my managerial experience set at the lowest. More fun that way

I find bigger teams far harder. With small teams I can do what they expect of me, finish mid table or avoid relegation, but with bigger teams the expectancy is success and imo success is far harder to achieve.

It also depends on how you play your game. I make it difficult for myself and try to follow rl management as closely as possible e.g. at Roma I focus my attentions on Italians and Brazilians in the transfer market, I try to play with a 4-6-0 and I accept offers that I consider good enough rather than hold out for as much as possible. It makes it a lot harder, and more enjoyable/realistic imo.

I like to start small and then "earn" a spot at a bigger team. I started at Grasshopper, am now at Fiorentina, and would like to eventually take over at Barcelona (or Portsmouth, who are huge on my save). There's a list of maybe ten teams that I'd consider going to right now.