PDA

View Full Version : Premiership Teams in order of reputation?



mark-united fan
23-09-2008, 14:58
ok,im editing my game for the 08/09 season and was just wondering what order of reputation would you give to the top 10 teams in the premiership?would it be
man u,chelsea,liverpool,arsenal,man city,tottenham etc...
what order would you put them in and does man citys new financial status have an effect on this?

matty_boy08
23-09-2008, 15:01
ok,im editing my game for the 08/09 season and was just wondering what order of reputation would you give to the top 10 teams in the premiership?would it be
man u,chelsea,liverpool,arsenal,man city,tottenham etc...
what order would you put them in and does man citys new financial status have an effect on this?

I would definitely increase Man City's reputation.
As for top 10 you could probably find a post or something
about that on here.

smithers08
23-09-2008, 15:10
IMO :

1) Manchester United
2) Chelsea
3) Liverpool
4) Arsenal
5) Man C
6) Spurs
7) Newcastle
8) Villa
9) Westham
10) Portsmouth
11) Everton
12) Blackburn
13) Sunderland
14) Boro
15) Fulham
16) Wigan
17) Bolton
18) West brom
19) Hull
20) Stoke

htygyr
23-09-2008, 15:11
i think it should be man utd, liverpool, chelsea, arsenal, Everton, City, Newcastle, Villa, Tottenham, Blackburn, West Ham, Bolton, Middlesborough, Portsmouth, Fulham, Sunderland, West Brom, Wigan, Stoke, Hull

SmurfDude
23-09-2008, 15:14
Liverpool would probably be ahead of Chelsea, they have a bigger fan base world wide

smithers08
23-09-2008, 15:16
It depends on what you mean by repuation , whether it is in terms of finacnes ,fan base or how well they are knwon around the world or attracting players.

nick2plimmer
23-09-2008, 15:27
1) Manchester United (double champions :p)
2) Chelsea
3) arsenl
4) spurs
5) portsmouth
6) everton
7) Newcastle
8) villa
9) Westham
10) west brom
11) Fulham
12) Blackburn
13) Sunderland
14) Boro
15) Stoke
16) Wigan
17) Bolton
18) Hull
19) Liverpool
20) Man C

SCIAG
23-09-2008, 15:29
Rep means ability to attract players. For example, Hull's rep should be above Leeds'.

I'd keep City's around it's current level until they sign another player on Robinho's level. IMO Spurs' rep should be higher than City's.

Also, the suggestion that Pompey and Everton should be behind Newcastle is strange.

glamdring
23-09-2008, 15:29
Newcastle ahead of Villa? :rolleyes:

Personally I'd keep them all at whatever level they are at, but then I don't like medaling with such things.

Neji
23-09-2008, 15:31
Yeah, why are people suggesting Newcastle should be so high?

smithers08
23-09-2008, 15:33
Newcastle are a bigger club , in terms of finincially at support base than Villa , Everton etc.

DanGLiverpool
23-09-2008, 15:34
1) Manchester United (double champions :p)
2) Chelsea
3) arsenl
4) spurs
5) portsmouth
6) everton
7) Newcastle
8) villa
9) Westham
10) west brom
11) Fulham
12) Blackburn
13) Sunderland
14) Boro
15) Stoke
16) Wigan
17) Bolton
18) Hull
19) Liverpool
20) Man C

well we can see someone is a man unted fan lol

Neji
23-09-2008, 15:37
1) Manchester United
2) Chelsea
3) Arsenal
4) Liverpool
5) Spurs
6) Man City
7) Villa
8) Everton
9) Portsmouth
10) Newcastle
11) West Ham
12) Blackburn
13) Boro
14) Sunderland
15) Fulham
16) Wigan
17) Bolton
18) West brom
19) Stoke
20) Hull

ell69
23-09-2008, 15:40
United, Chelsea, Arsenal, Man City, Liverpool, Everton, Villa.

glamdring
23-09-2008, 15:41
If reputation is purely the ability to attract players surely all you need to do is look at who signed for which clubs and determine the order from that?!

rougess
23-09-2008, 15:43
1) Manchester United
2) Chelsea
3) Liverpool
4) Arsenal
5) Spurs
6) Man City
7) Villa
8) Newcastle
9) Everton
10) Portsmouth
11) Middlesborough
12) Blackburn
13) West Ham
14) Sunderland
15) Fulham
16) Bolton
17) Wigan
18) West Brom
19) Stoke
20) Hull

SCIAG
23-09-2008, 15:54
If reputation is purely the ability to attract players surely all you need to do is look at who signed for which clubs and determine the order from that?!
Pretty much (a few minor things such as the number of shirts they sell in Japan to consider too).

1)Man United (close to max)
2)Chelsea (about 15 behind United)
3)Arsenal (about 40 behind Chelsea)
4)Liverpool (about 30 behind Arsenal)
5)Spurs (300 or more behind Liverpool)
6)City (close behind Spurs, say 20 points?)
7)Everton (60 points behind City)
8.Pompey (30 points behind Everton)
9)Villa (15 points behind Pompey)
10)Blackburn (50 points behind Villa)
11)West Ham (50 points or more behind Blackburn)
12)Newcastle (50 points or more behind West Ham)
13)Boro (30 points or so behind Newcastle)
14)Wigan (45 points or so behind 'boro)
15)Bolton (15 points behind Wigan)
16)Sunderland (15 points behind Bolton)
17)Fulham (15 points behind Sund'land
18)West Brom (50 points behind Fulham)
19)Stoke (10 below West Brom)
20)Hull (5 below Stoke)

I had to increase the gaps in rep to make it more balanced.

The Chosen One
23-09-2008, 16:01
1) Chelsea
2) Manchester United
3) Arsenal
4) Liverpool
5) Man City
6) Spurs
7) Newcastle United
8) Everton
9) A Villa
10) Portsmouth

Andy Clarke
23-09-2008, 16:08
A lot of people think very highly of Newcastle then!!

rougess
23-09-2008, 16:12
A lot of people think very highly of Newcastle then!!

massive fanbase, one of the richest (in terms of assets, etc), and it wasn't too many years ago that they were doing well in the league and were in the champions league. in terms of attracting players, they'll drop considerably imo, due to what's gone on, no self-respecting manager / player would want to manage / play for them atm

elgreenio
23-09-2008, 16:18
1). United
2). Chelski
3). Farcenal
4). Liverpool
5). Spurs

cant be bothered to squabble over the others

kevinM182
23-09-2008, 16:24
A lot of people think very highly of Newcastle then!!

they have before the emirates came, newcastle had the 2nd highest attendance, even though they haven't won anything in 50 years


No other club in the <u> world</u> has fans that loyal

kevinM182
23-09-2008, 16:24
A lot of people think very highly of Newcastle then!!

they have before the emirates came, newcastle had the 2nd highest attendance, even though they haven't won anything in 50 years


No other club in the world has fans that loyal

Falastur
23-09-2008, 16:41
they have before the emirates came, newcastle had the 2nd highest attendance, even though they haven't won anything in 50 years


No other club in the world has fans that loyal

That's not necessarily true. I respect Newcastle's fans massively, but let's not forget, among other things, that Man City were turning an average attendance of over 30,000 after being relegated twice in two seasons, which was an attendance four times larger than the other teams, despite the massive feel-bad factor, and City hasn't won anything in almost as long as Newcastle - we haven't come 2nd in the Premier League, either. I'm not saying Newcastle couldn't be that loyal, or that City's fans are better, but I think that to make a statement that Newcastle's fans are the most loyal just because they haven't won anything recently and because they love their club is a little short-sighted, especially considering they haven't been through what other clubs have, so we can't draw a comparison on those levels...

SCIAG
23-09-2008, 16:49
Surely fans of Fisher Athletic and even further down are more loyal than Newcastle's. Do they deserve huge reps?

rougess
23-09-2008, 16:53
Surely fans of Fisher Athletic and even further down are more loyal than Newcastle's. Do they deserve huge reps?

quantity as well as quality is important

Neji
23-09-2008, 16:57
What does fanbase have to do with reputation?

laurencefishbone
23-09-2008, 17:06
they have before the emirates came, newcastle had the 2nd highest attendance, even though they haven't won anything in 50 years


No other club in the world has fans that loyal

So where were 40,000 of these 'loyal' supporters 17 years ago?

gcormack
23-09-2008, 17:13
1) Man Utd
2) Liverpool
3) Chelsea
4) Arsenal
5) Spurs
6) Newcastle
7) Everton
8) Villa
9) Man C
10) West Ham

cam.ncfc
23-09-2008, 17:20
hull above stoke definetely

roversawh7
24-09-2008, 02:17
Here's 8.0.2 for reference:

Manchester United 9250
Chelsea 9200
Liverpool 8850
Arsenal 8800
Tottenham 7350
Newcastle 7150
Everton 7000
Aston Villa 6850
Manchester City 6850
West Ham 6850
Blackburn 6750
Bolton 6700
Middlesbrough 6700
Portsmouth 6500
Sunderland 6200
Birmingham 6150
Fulham 6050
Wigan 6000
Reading 5900
Derby 5750

bcm
24-09-2008, 02:26
1) Manchester United (double champions :p)
2) Chelsea
3) arsenl
4) spurs
5) portsmouth
6) everton
7) Newcastle
8) villa
9) Westham
10) west brom
11) Fulham
12) Blackburn
13) Sunderland
14) Boro
15) Stoke
16) Wigan
17) Bolton
18) Hull
19) Liverpool
20) Man C

Someone is sour for losing last week, lol

Danny Dire
24-09-2008, 10:16
They should do reputation by how ARD your fans are. West Ham obviously being the ardest of the lot.

CGSilva5
24-09-2008, 10:50
I honestly see the departure of Mourinho a dent in Chelsea's rep, I can't see them being ahead of Arsenal, but probably higher than Liverpool.

Man Utd
Arsenal
Chelsea
Liverpool

with the signings of Robinho, Jo, Elano, Kompany, etc I think that City will jump the likes of Spurs, Newcastle and Villa.

Man City
Spurs
Newcastle
Villa
Everton

the rest, I don't have the paitence.

Kyno
24-09-2008, 11:05
1. Man Utd (Twice Premier League champions, and current European champions too.)
2. Chelsea (A fairly obvious choice for 2nd)
3. Liverpool (While the squad isn't as good as Arsenal's, they have won the Champions League "recently" and also have an enormous history)
4. Arsenal (They're called "The Big Four" for a reason!)

5. Spurs
6. Everton
7. Man City
8. Aston Villa
9. Newcastle United
10. Portsmouth/Sunderland

kccircle
24-09-2008, 13:55
1). United
2). Chelski
3). Farcenal
4). Liverpool
5). Spurs

cant be bothered to squabble over the others

And there you have it in one with what is wrong with football!

kccircle
24-09-2008, 14:05
Fanbase shouldn't come into reputation, but it does.

Ask a player whether he would prefer to play in front of 50k or 20k and most would chose the former.

Additionally the location of the club counts for a lot too. Clubs around London and Manchester would find it easier to attract players than the likes of Norwich, Carlisle, Hull and Bristol.

Using the figures above you would have perhaps every Premier League club starting with a reputation of 5000. Add on a figure for fanbase (not a large number), then a figure for location and then finally add in a figure for likelihood of winning trophies. Perhaps historical data can be factored in too eg Huddersfield whilst being in league 1 would have a higher reputation than Bradford despite Bradford being a Prem Lg club not so long ago. Huddersfields 3 Div 1 titles in the 30's (I think) would give their rep a small boost.

And finally, during the summer Hull signed Geovanni in an attempt to increase the reputation of the club (Jay Jay last season) in an effort to use him as a carrot to entice other players. No idea how this would be factored in?

MrPompey
24-09-2008, 14:13
IMO :

1) Manchester United
2) Chelsea
3) Liverpool
4) Arsenal
5) Man C
6) Spurs
7) Newcastle
8) Villa
9) Westham
10) Portsmouth
11) Everton
12) Blackburn
13) Sunderland
14) Boro
15) Fulham
16) Wigan
17) Bolton
18) West brom
19) Hull
20) Stoke

A reputation must be based on previous achivements, not on the promise of future ones. Man City's reputation can not be changed until its proven in game by league position, cup progress etc. Having lots of money doesn't improve reputation. How its spent and reflected in team results will

6-0 drubbing of them against Pompey is in sufficient

kccircle
24-09-2008, 14:34
A reputation must be based on previous achivements, not on the promise of future ones. Man City's reputation can not be changed until its proven in game by league position, cup progress etc. Having lots of money doesn't improve reputation. How its spent and reflected in team results will

6-0 drubbing of them against Pompey is in sufficient

Sour grapes? :)

Nomis07
24-09-2008, 14:43
This thread genuinely makes me sad about football :( How anyone can consider Man City as having a bigger reputation than Spurs, Newcastle, Villa and Everton is beyond me. Also it pains me to say it, but surely Liverpool should be higher than Chelsea.

SmurfDude
24-09-2008, 14:55
This thread genuinely makes me sad about football :( How anyone can consider Man City as having a bigger reputation than Spurs, Newcastle, Villa and Everton is beyond me. Also it pains me to say it, but surely Liverpool should be higher than Chelsea.

That's what I thought too

Liverpool are the most successful club in English history and have a huge fan base, therefore a worldwide reputation, but not as big as manchester united, but certainly bigger than Chelsea's

It seems most people in this thread are confusing reputation with wealth

Definition of reputation:
1. the estimation in which a person or thing is held, esp. by the community or the public generally; repute: a man of good reputation.
2. favorable repute; good name: to ruin one's reputation by misconduct.
3. a favorable and publicly recognized name or standing for merit, achievement, reliability, etc.: to build up a reputation.
4. the estimation or name of being, having, having done, etc., something specified: He has the reputation of being a shrewd businessman.


Now someone tell me how Chelsea rank above Liverpool based on any of the above definitions?

If we were talking about ability to pull a world class player, then Chelsea would be higher due to having bigger pockets, but that's completely different to what reputation is about

Neji
24-09-2008, 14:59
If we were talking about ability to pull a world class player, then Chelsea would be higher due to having bigger pockets, but that's completely different to what reputation is about

Thats what mine was based on because IMO this is the major reason for changing the reputations in game.

MrPompey
24-09-2008, 15:52
Sour grapes? :)

LOL - It was a joke. What is funnier is seeing Newcastle so high. Judging by their debt and lack of silverware I can't see how anyone thinks they are that high. How many Manager's have turned down Newcastle, its a joke. They are bottom 10 easy, Spurs also

American Gloryhunter
24-09-2008, 16:15
They should do reputation by how ARD your fans are. West Ham obviously being the ardest of the lot.

The only time Millwall would find themselves in the top-flight of anything for the next century!

EDIT: Danny, I loved you in The Football Factory. And The Real Football Factories. And The Real Football Factories International. And Charlie And The Chocolate Factory.

SCIAG
24-09-2008, 16:36
That's what I thought too

Liverpool are the most successful club in English history and have a huge fan base, therefore a worldwide reputation, but not as big as manchester united, but certainly bigger than Chelsea's

It seems most people in this thread are confusing reputation with wealth

Definition of reputation:
1. the estimation in which a person or thing is held, esp. by the community or the public generally; repute: a man of good reputation.
2. favorable repute; good name: to ruin one's reputation by misconduct.
3. a favorable and publicly recognized name or standing for merit, achievement, reliability, etc.: to build up a reputation.
4. the estimation or name of being, having, having done, etc., something specified: He has the reputation of being a shrewd businessman.


Now someone tell me how Chelsea rank above Liverpool based on any of the above definitions?

If we were talking about ability to pull a world class player, then Chelsea would be higher due to having bigger pockets, but that's completely different to what reputation is about
Actually, your last sentence is exactly what rep is about in FM. It's the ability to attract players. Hence why Wigan's is higher than Leeds'. I don't think City's should be put up too high until they sign another player of Robinho's ilk.

GillsMan
24-09-2008, 16:59
This thread genuinely makes me sad about football :( How anyone can consider Man City as having a bigger reputation than Spurs, Newcastle, Villa and Everton is beyond me. Also it pains me to say it, but surely Liverpool should be higher than Chelsea.

In terms of ability to attract players, I think City probably are higher than at least three of the four teams you mentioned.

In terms of normal definition of reputation - I agree with you.

nick2plimmer
02-10-2008, 18:06
Someone is sour for losing last week, lol


nar not really, ill be happy at the end of the season when liverpool fail agen

Wee Aja
02-10-2008, 18:56
Liverpool should have a world class reputation in FM because they do IRL, just behind Man Yoo despite remaining considerably more successful, and WAY ahead of Chelsea and Arsenal who have won how many European Cups?...
I imagine SI are waiting for Liverpool to win the league IRL before upping their rep in the game.
It's odd how, even now after 18yrs without winning it, Liverpool are considered among the title contenders every year.

x42bn6
02-10-2008, 19:07
Liverpool should have a world class reputation in FM because they do IRL, just behind Man Yoo despite remaining considerably more successful, and WAY ahead of Chelsea and Arsenal who have won how many European Cups?...
I imagine SI are waiting for Liverpool to win the league IRL before upping their rep in the game.
It's odd how, even now after 18yrs without winning it, Liverpool are considered among the title contenders every year.
"Reputation" in the game is not equal to "reputation" in real-life.

"Reputation" in the game is a measure of "attractiveness" of a team to a player based on success. If Messi left Barcelona for some reason, he'd want to go to Chelsea rather than Liverpool despite Liverpool arguably having a higher "reputation" in real-life.

Leeds, Newcastle and so on have fairly high real-life reputations but (rightfully) relatively-poor ones in the game, simply because they can't attract the best players. They can't in real-life either!