Biggest without top flight football

[Ave IT]

I’ve always embraced the “biggest city never to have had top flight football” as something of a badge of (dis)honour that sets us apart …… I even claim it on a European level – although apparently that’s not quite true though as there is somewhere in East Europe with a population of about 1.5million that outdoes us …….but then again if your one claim to fame is being the biggest failure – but then that just fails, doesn't that make it an even better claim? :crazy:

 

[Bermudian Green]

I’ve always embraced the “biggest city never to have had top flight football” as something of a badge of (dis)honour that sets us apart …… I even claim it on a European level – although apparently that’s not quite true though as there is somewhere in East Europe with a population of about 1.5million that outdoes us …….but then again if your one claim to fame is being the biggest failure – but then that just fails, doesn't that make it an even better claim? :crazy:

Insomuchas "we're so bad we can't even get that (dis)honour right? Yep! :greensmile:

 

[memory man]

For context, here's the video:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hIBY-bjeNR8

Clubs mentioned are Brentford, Luton, Argyle, Preston, Notts County, Millwall and Bristol City.

Other Youtube videos offering different opinions on the same subject are available.

I thought Notts County had played Top Flight Football ?

As have Brentford.

And Bristol City - 5 seasons prior to the Great War and 3 seasons in the 70s. Notts Co are founder members and they have spent a lot of seasons in the top tier.

 

[crownhill pilgrim]

For context, here's the video:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hIBY-bjeNR8

Clubs mentioned are Brentford, Luton, Argyle, Preston, Notts County, Millwall and Bristol City.

Other Youtube videos offering different opinions on the same subject are available.

I thought Notts County had played Top Flight Football ?

As have Brentford.

And Millwall. And Luton... a few seasons in the Top Tier in the 50s and again in the 80s.

 

[phil thefluter24]

Have supported Argyle for more seasons than i care to remember ,if my fading memory serves me correctly we always yo yoed between the old lgs 2 &3 but am afraid without serious investment realistically we are destined to not even reach the championship let alone the so called "promised land" it will be further out of our reach than ever
I do agree with a previous comment the S W seems more than ever to end at Bristol

 

[edengreen]

Living in Doncaster I think I'm correct in stating that Doncaster has a larger population than Plymouth despite only being a town
Only 7000 of them.like football though !!

 

[Darrenpafc]

Plymouth's population is much bigger than the town of Doncaster. The town of Doncaster has a population of about 110,000. The metropolitan borough has a slightly larger population but not the town.

 

[JimC]

Plymouth is much bigger than Doncaster, even including the urban area around Donny.

Link to 2011 census stats by urban areas.

Of the places bigger than Plymouth, only Birkenhead (Tranmere) and Newport (which is only bigger because it's combined with long stretches of the valleys) are currently doing worse than us by league position, and both of them are on the doorstep of top flight clubs.

 

[Biggs]

Doncaster bigger than Plymouth? :crazy:

Touched on above, but it's also worth noting that a lot of the cities down as bigger than Plymouth, are in fact either vast swathes of country covered in a blanket and just given an arbitrary name of the biggest town (Wakefield) or places with a big metro area (Bradford, that includes Keighley and Ilkley etc). Or Southampton, with a metro area including... Portsmouth :lol:

Plymouth doesn't have that and all the population figures are of the city itself. If it did the numbers would include places like Ivybridge, Saltash, Torpoint and maybe Tavistock.

Neither Newport, Wakefield or Doncaster themselves are anywhere near as big as Plymouth itself. And even cities like the aforementioned Southampton probably aren't either.

 

[Lundan Cabbie]

Doncaster bigger than Plymouth? :crazy:

Touched on above, but it's also worth noting that a lot of the cities down as bigger than Plymouth, are in fact either vast swathes of country covered in a blanket and just given an arbitrary name of the biggest town (Wakefield) or places with a big metro area (Bradford, that includes Keighley and Ilkley etc). Or Southampton, with a metro area including... Portsmouth :lol:

Plymouth doesn't have that and all the population figures are of the city itself. If it did the numbers would include places like Ivybridge, Saltash, Torpoint and maybe Tavistock.

Neither Newport, Wakefield or Doncaster themselves are anywhere near as big as Plymouth itself. And even cities like the aforementioned Southampton probably aren't either.

So you want to re-write what a City is by definition then? A place granted City Status IS a city, end of. Wakefield might be a collection of a dozen towns but has been a royal decreed City since 1888.

What you are describing above are "Urban built-up areas" rather than cities. On the list of the largest, Southend-on-Sea Built-up area, with a population of 295,000 and an area of 71.8 sq Km is larger than Plymouth Built-up area, population 260,000 and area of 59.7 sq Km. Southend-on-Sea too have never hosted top flight football.

Birkenhead Built-up area (325,000/88.2 sq Km) is the largest to not have hosted top flight football, however it can be argued that it is also part of the Liverpool Metropolitan area.

Either way, Plymouth doesn't have to carry this badge of dishonour. We can let either Wakefield, Birkenhead or Southend have it.

Unless of course you actually WANT it to be Plymouth.

 

[edengreen]

Ok then let's put it like this as a city the folk of Plymouth should be ashamed because if it's as big as everyone is saying then crowds should be 20,000 each week
Plymouth has all of Cornwall to call on and yet can only muster 10 to 12k each week
Doncaster and it's borough is full of Leeds sheff Utd and sheff weds fans as well as Newcastle and Liverpool and can still pull 7k as a little town

I guess being the bullling yourself up as the biggest city isn't quite as appealing now because it really shows actually what everyone else thinks of us that we are a small insignificant club
A league table based on town /city would actually be a fairer indication of size of support in the town as much as i hate them.i think Burnley would be somewhere near the top ! Would also like to know the percentage of travelling Pilgrims whom reside in the City limits of Plymouth as a percentage I would imagine that it's very low

Argyle as a club are lucky to have the exiles and the Cornish despite stabbing them in the back when big match tickets were available and selling to people whom really had no right to them.just because there main team was in town! the Green Army is everywhere

I'm a proud janner but by living away from home for a number of years now can actually see the other side of this big club potential argument and this is backed up by why we don't have investors tripping over themselves to invest in us despite being such a big city with this potential that only ever turns out once or twice every 10 years when we get a big cup tie or promotion

 

[JannerinCardiff]

If we were in the prem I’m sure we’d be able to have 25,000 regularly at home matches. I still believe we could be a decent sized club if we had the investment.

 

[edengreen]

If we were in the prem I’m sure we’d be able to have 25,000 regularly at home matches. I still believe we could be a decent sized club if we had the investment.

I have no doubt but 20k every week now would make that investment more likely ! Chicken and eggs spring to mind why should anyone put money in without the guarantee of growth it's in workable unless an argyle fan wins on euro millions and decides to pump 50 million in ! If I did it I would love to do that but not sure my wife would be so keen !
Nothing separates a fool and his money more that loose women fast cars a football clubs !!

 

[Biggs]

LC... Wakefield was given city status in 1888, but that’s for Wakefield itself (population 99,000). The City of Wakefield is the metropolitan borough created in 1974 and covers completely unrelated towns to Wakefield. Birkenhead is almost exactly the same, the actual settlement of Birkenhead has a population of 88,000.

Being the biggest city not to have top flight status might not be a badge of honour, but being a bigger city in general is a source of municipal pride.

Plymouth as a city is bigger than Wakefield, Southend, Birkenhead and various other places that have given themselves an inflated figure by chucking in completely unrelated towns and vast areas of countryside and villages. Plymouth hasn’t done this, but if it did it would include places like Ivybridge, Saltash, Torpoint and Tavistock and take in closer to 400,000.

You said it yourself, you’re talking about urban areas and metropolitan boroughs rather than the places themselves. Suggesting Southend itself is bigger than Plymouth is plainly preposterous.

 

[Lundan Cabbie]

Suggesting Southend itself is bigger than Plymouth is plainly preposterous.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_u ... ed_Kingdom