So hear me out, the current top 10 clubs in the Premier League should be considered a “big 10”. So the general rule for a club to be considered a part of “big x” they have to be:
- Big club - a big fanbase and history
- Financial strength - ability to spend a lot to buy playera
- Pull factor - playera wanting to join the club just becuse of the club name
- Consistent success
Now there is no doubt why the “big 6” is part of this “big 10”.
Now Aston Villa, Newcastle are big clubs, spend a lot, pull players from big clubs from other leagues and have had consistent good results in last 2 season.
West Ham is a big club, with consistent results (apart from last season). However, they have less pull factor and less financial strength from clubs listed above. But, I believe that their ability is in these categories is still better than bottom 10 clubs so that’s why they should still be considered part of “big 10”.
Brighton is the only highly questionable. They have results and relative financial strength. However, they have almost no pull factor and aren’t a big club. But if their results continue to be good they will start to become a big club and gain a pull factor.
That’s why I believe Arsenal, Liverpool, City, Tottenham, Spurs, United, Newcastle, Aston Villa, Brighton and West Ham are part of “Big 10”. What do you think?
The ‘big 6’ is just a Sky creation. From the start they’ve seen the PL like a soap opera with main characters and supporting characters and they still sell it like that.
It has very little to do with performances on the pitch - succeed or fail the narrative is all about those six clubs. Just watch Monday night football when two ‘other 14’ clubs are playing - they’ll still spend the first 50 minutes of the pre-match coverage talking about whatever the current drama surrounding a ‘big 6’ club is.
There’s no point trying to rationalise or change it because it has always been artificial.