The Debate is over Gary
- buddhabubba
- Aug 19
- 28 min read
An open letter to Gary Neville and the rest of the Man Utd Fanbase from ChatGPT and David Gill (no, not that one).
I was at the 20 Times Champion’s parade at the end of last season. The amount of people that turned up was unprecedented for us as a club. The scenes were magnificent, and I couldn’t imagine any sports team in the world managing such a turn-out. So I asked your mate ChatGPT to give me a run down of the highest ever recorded attendances in Sports at a trophy parade, and this is what I was presented with (copied and pasted from ChatGPT ):
NB: Green font is ChatGPT results/response.
🏆 Top 20 Trophy Parade Attendances (Most to Least)
1️⃣ Argentina (2022 World Cup) – ~5 million
2️⃣ Chicago Cubs (2016 World Series) – ~5 million
3️⃣ France (1998 World Cup) – ~3 million
4️⃣ Boston Red Sox (2004 World Series) – ~3 million
5️⃣ Spain (2010 World Cup) – ~2 million
6️⃣ Chicago Blackhawks (2013 Stanley Cup) – ~2 million
7️⃣ Philadelphia Phillies (2008 World Series) – ~2 million
8️⃣ Bayern Munich (2013 Champions League) – ~1.8 million
9️⃣ Liverpool FC (2025 Premier League) – ~1.5 million
🔟 France (2018 World Cup) – ~1.5 million
1️⃣1️⃣ Liverpool FC (2022 League and FA Cup Double) – ~1.3 million 1️⃣2️⃣ FC Barcelona (2006 La Liga) – ~1.2 million
1️⃣3️⃣ Germany (2014 World Cup) – ~1 million
1️⃣4️⃣ Liverpool FC (2005 Champions League) – ~1 million
1️⃣5️⃣ Real Madrid (2014 Champions League) – ~1 million
1️⃣6️⃣ Liverpool FC (2019 Champions League) – ~750,000
1️⃣7️⃣ FC Barcelona (2025 Domestic Treble) – ~670,000–700,000
1️⃣8️⃣ Manchester United (1999 Treble) – ~500,000
1️⃣9️⃣ New England Patriots (2019 Super Bowl) – ~500,000
2️⃣0️⃣ Toronto Raptors (2019 NBA) – ~500,000
As you’ll see from the above breakdown, my club Liverpool Football Club appears 4 times, with only Bayern Munich above us in regards to world club football institutions.Your boys managed to scrape in at joint last in a top 20, for that historic treble you keep trying to taunt us with.
So does this make us a bigger club? Of course not. So what quantifies the biggest club? I watched as you argued with Jamie Carragher, back and forth over the season about who was the biggest club. You had to concede that Liverpool were the most successful club, but still wouldn’t concede that we are the biggest. Carra said he'd concede Liverpool weren't the biggest club if you'd admit that Liverpool were the most successful and best, which you then categorically refused to do. Honestly though, what constitutes biggest or best. To echo Carragher’s notorious Sky interview: what's bigger? More money or… what?
Biggest or Best. They're both ephemeral titles, subjective if you will, and probably interchangeable. They would need to be determined by an agreed set of criteria.
In order to settle the debate you pushed ChatGPT until it said that Manchester United are the biggest club, but all ChatGPT does is access the information it's fed. And the idea that Manchester Utd is the biggest club in the world, except maybe they'll concede to Real Madrid, is an idea that's been perpetuated for a long time. So it's plausible that when pushed ChatGPT would have a bias based on these myths. Heck, even I've reluctantly and begrudgingly conceded Manchester Utd to be the biggest team in the country, or even world at various points in my life, as that's the narrative that's been rammed down our throats, but does that actually stand up to a rigorous inspection?
Let's see shall we. I sat down with ChatGPT (your bezzy) for a quick tete a tete using the Deep Research feature.
After a little bit of a collaborative effort we decided on breaking the criteria down, to try to make it as fair as possible, for who is historically the biggest club. I’ve kept it to Football, as that’s all we're really interested in here right? At this point I should say I tried to do this as a world club breakdown, which would then be given a negative score based on the competitiveness of the league/cup but ChatGPT almost had a stroke, as did I.
So we went with establishing the Top 10 clubs in the English Top Flight for brevity.
The Criteria we used:
Historic success with nuanced prestige values for each title type (35%)
League consistency over time (15%)
Fan loyalty from attendances and support base (25%)
Cultural/media impact and influence (15%)
Global reach (5%)
Youth development impact (5%)
Here I’ll hand over to Chat GPT to explain what it was attempting to do, and how?
Understanding the Task and Clarifications
*Timeframe (Foundation of Modern Football):** I interpret “since the foundation of modern football in England” to mean covering the entire history of organized English football (likely from the late 19th century when the Football League began in 1888, or the FA’s formation in 1863). Essentially, we’ll consider the entire span of English football history so that no club’s era of dominance is overlooked. (If you intended a specific start date (e.g. post-WWII or Premier League era only), let me know, but I’ll assume the full historical scope.)
*Trophy Categories (Avoid Double-Counting):** We will carefully distinguish between different trophy types so nothing is counted twice. For example:
“Top Tier International trophies” will include major *European/International titles** like the UEFA Champions League/European Cup, UEFA Europa League/UEFA Cup, Cup Winners’ Cup, and possibly global titles like the FIFA Club World Cup or the old Intercontinental Cup.
“One-off game titles” will cover *Super Cup-style** trophies (Community Shield, UEFA Super Cup, Intercontinental Cup if considered one-off, playoff finals, etc.). We’ll ensure that if a trophy is a one-match decider, it’s evaluated in that category and not mixed into the multi-game tournament count.
We’ll also apply a *prestige weighting**: e.g. a Champions League is far more significant than a Community Shield. As you noted, a promotion playoff win (a one-off game) would be given much less weight than even a domestic cup, and a domestic cup would be less than a European trophy. We’ll reflect that in the scoring so that bigger achievements contribute more to the “Historic Success” score.
*Competitive Consistency:** We’ll look at long-term league performance. This could include metrics like total seasons in the top flight, all-time average league finish, or number of consecutive years in top flight. For example, some clubs (like Arsenal) have never (or very rarely) been relegated in the modern era, indicating consistent high performance. I’ll gather historical league data (likely from official records or reputable databases) to quantify this consistency.
*Historic Attendance & Fan Loyalty:** This is a crucial but challenging category. I plan to gather:
*Historical attendance figures** – average home attendances over different eras (e.g., peaks in the 1940s-50s vs modern capacities) and perhaps the percentage of stadiums filled (if data available). Some clubs historically draw huge crowds even in lower divisions (indicating loyalty).
*Away support** – perhaps records or anecdotes of how well fans travel (e.g., consistently selling out away allocations). Not all data is recorded, but any rankings or studies on away attendance will help.
*Victory parade attendances** – how many fans turn up when the club wins a trophy, as a sign of widespread support. (For instance, clubs like Liverpool or Manchester City have had hundreds of thousands at parades in recent years; I’ll find exact figures from news sources.)
*OSC numbers** – I believe this refers to Official Supporters’ Club membership numbers or the number of official supporter branches. I’ll try to find historical membership figures or the number of official fan clubs domestically and internationally for each team. This will show how fan support grew over time.
*Cultural Impact & Legacy:** We’ll need to compile qualitative and quantitative indicators of cultural impact:
Listing *iconic players** produced or associated with the club (e.g., Bobby Charlton and George Best for Man United, Bill Shankly’s influence at Liverpool, etc.), especially those who became global icons.
* Noting instances of clubs in pop culture – references in movies, music, literature, or just general global knowledge. (For example, Manchester United and Liverpool are frequently referenced worldwide due to their global fan bases, Leeds United’s story was told in films like “The Damned United,” etc.)
*Club influence in media** – perhaps how often these clubs are featured in international broadcasts historically, or involvement of their personnel in global events (like charity, social causes, etc.). This part is a bit subjective, but I’ll use independent sources where possible – such as surveys of most popular clubs globally, or cultural studies/articles that mention the club’s impact.
*Global Reach:** We will look for data on historic TV audiences (e.g. record TV audiences for matches involving these clubs, or which clubs historically drew big global viewership). Also, metrics like:
* The evolution of global fanbases (some clubs publish estimated numbers of fans worldwide or social media followings, though social media is very recent – but we can cite current figures as a proxy for global reach).
* Presence of the club’s merchandise or tours around the world historically. (Manchester United’s tours in the USA or Asia in the 1960s and onwards, etc., which indicate reach.)
Given the 5% weight, we just need high-level indicators to differentiate clubs slightly.
*Contribution to the Wider Game:** For youth development contributions, I’ll research:
* Notable players across history that came from each club’s youth academy and made it big either at the club or elsewhere (for example, West Ham’s academy produced many top players who won the World Cup with England in 1966, Manchester United’s Class of ’92, Southampton’s youth producing many Premier League talents, etc.).
* Possibly any quantitative data like “Number of graduates from X club who have gone on to play in top-flight or international football.” Sometimes the media have done studies on which academies produced the most Premier League players. I’ll look for those as independent references.
## Estimated Time to Completion
This task will take a considerable amount of time to do properly, because it involves collecting data from many different sources and ensuring accuracy. I’ll need to gather historical statistics, verify them from independent and reliable sources, and then calculate weighted scores.
Here’s a rough breakdown of what’s involved and how long each part might take:
*Data Gathering (Trophies, League History):** Gathering all trophy counts and league performance data for the major clubs could take a few hours. Many of these data are available via Wikipedia or RSSSF or the clubs’ official sites. I will double-check across sources for accuracy (e.g., ensuring counts of league titles, cups, European trophies are correct and up-to-date through 2025).
*Data Gathering (Attendance & Fan Data):** This part is tricky and might take longer. Historical attendance records may require digging into archives or specialized sources. I might find compiled statistics for all-time average attendances or specific notable figures for each club. Parade attendance figures will come from news articles for each major trophy win – searching those could take some time for each club’s big victories. Estimating this, it could be several hours of research alone to compile a fair picture for 10 clubs.
*Cultural Impact & Global Reach:** This will involve more reading and qualitative data – possibly searching for phrases like “most popular clubs in world history” or “cultural impact of \[Club]”. Summarizing this information in a balanced way might take a couple of hours as well, since I want to ensure I cite credible analyses or at least give concrete examples rather than just opinions.
*Youth Development Contributions:** I will look for any studies or articles (maybe by media or the FA) listing clubs with top youth academies historically. This may be quicker if such a list exists (perhaps an article like “Top academies that produced England players” etc.). If not readily available, I may have to manually compile examples for each club, which is doable but time-consuming (let’s say another hour or two).
*Scoring and Ranking:** Once all data is gathered, I’ll need to create a scoring system in line with the weights (35% success, 15% consistency, etc.). That might involve normalizing each category (since they have different units – some are counts of trophies, some are percentages or subjective). I’ll likely create a simple table or spreadsheet to assign scores to each club in each category, then sum up for the total out of 100. Designing a fair scoring method and calculating it might take an hour or two. I will document how I calculate these scores so it’s transparent.
*Compilation and Write-up:** Finally, writing the answer with all the findings, explanations, and citations for each factual claim will also take some time. I’ll produce a table of the top 10 clubs with their total score out of 100, and likely include a breakdown by category (so the reasoning is clear). This could take a few hours to write clearly, given the amount of information.
Taking all of the above into account, I would estimate at least a full day of work (possibly 10-12 hours of focused research and analysis) to get everything as accurate as possible. Realistically, to double-check facts and ensure complete accuracy, it might span over a couple of days (so I can cross-verify information and not rush any conclusions).
Accuracy is the priority, as you specified, so I’ll take whatever time is needed to verify each piece of data. If I encounter any difficulties finding certain data (for example, if precise historical attendance percentages aren’t documented), I’ll make a note of it and either find a reasonable proxy or discuss how to handle that gap.
In summary, this is a complex task that I anticipate will take quite a bit of time (likely a day or two of careful work) to ensure we have a *fully accurate and justified ranking of the top 10 English clubs** by these criteria. I’ll prioritize thoroughness and accuracy every step of the way.*
TL;DR – Cos I know you’ve not read all that 😀
Scope: Full history of English football (from FA in 1863 or League in 1888).
Trophies: Categorised and weighted by importance:
Top-tier international (e.g. Champions League)
One-off games
Avoid double-counting
Consistency: Based on league stats like top-flight seasons, average finish, and years without relegation.
Fanbase & Loyalty: Looking at historical attendance, away support, parade crowds, and supporter club numbers.
Cultural Impact: Assessing iconic players, media presence, and pop culture relevance.
Global Reach: Includes TV audiences, fanbase size, social media, and global tours.
Youth Development: Identifying top academies and clubs producing top players.
Method: Data will be gathered from reliable sources, scored according to set weightings, and presented in a ranked table of top 10 clubs with full transparency.
ETA: Roughly 10–12 hours of focused work (spread over a day or two), with an emphasis on accuracy over speed.
The “roughly” bit was an understatement, with it taking almost 3 days to complete the task. The final answer came back like this:
Here comes the full breakdown of the Top 10 Biggest English Football Clubs using your weighted system. Each club scored out of 100 based on:
🏆 Historic Success (35%)
📈 Competitive Consistency (15%)
👥 Fan Loyalty & Attendance (25%)
🎭 Cultural Impact & Legacy (15%)
🌍 Global Reach (5%)
🧠 Contribution to the Wider Game (5%)
Rank Club Score (/100)
1️⃣ Liverpool 92.5
2️⃣ Manchester Utd 91.6
3️⃣ Arsenal 78.1
4️⃣ Chelsea 72.6
5️⃣ Manchester City 68.4
6️⃣ Tottenham 64.1
7️⃣ Everton 61.7
8️⃣ Aston Villa 59.9
9️⃣ Newcastle Utd 57.8
🔟 Leeds United 54.3
So there you go. Y’see, that settles it. Liverpool are the biggest club in the English Top Flight. I could leave it there, but I know a bunch of numbers isn’t going to convince anyone. How did ChatGPT come to this conclusion? Well it didn’t really say. This was the best it gave me:
🔍 Breakdown by Club
1. Liverpool (92.5)
🏆 Historic Success: 52 major trophies, including 6 UCLs and 20 league titles
📈 Consistency: Only one relegation since 1960s, consistent top-half finishes
👥 Fan Loyalty: Global supporter base, highest away followings, 750k+ title parade
🎭 Culture: Shankly, Paisley, Klopp, YNWA, Beatles connection
🌍 Global: Massive growth since 2010s, top shirt sales in Asia/Africa
🧠 Youth: Strong academy: Gerrard, Trent, Fowler, McManaman
2. Manchester United (89.2)
🏆 Historic Success: 20 league titles, 3 UCLs, most FA Cups
📈 Consistency: Only relegated a handful of times, dominant under Fergie
👥 Fan Loyalty: Historic average attendance highest in England
🎭 Culture: Beckham, Best, Class of '92, Red Devils branding, media footprint
🌍 Global: Long-standing leader in international tours, shirt sales
🧠 Youth: Elite: Busby Babes to Rashford era
3. Arsenal (78.1)
🏆 Success: 14 FA Cups, 13 leagues, Invincibles era
📈 Consistency: Never relegated since 1913
👥 Loyalty: High Emirates-era attendances, strong national fan base
🎭 Culture: Wenger revolution, film/TV references, global neutral appeal
🌍 Global: Big in USA and Africa
🧠 Youth: Saka, Smith Rowe, Wilshere, Rocastle
4. Chelsea (72.6)
🏆 Success: 2 UCLs, 6 leagues, multiple domestic cups
📈 Consistency: Pre-2000s patchy; dominant since 2004
👥 Loyalty: Home fans loyal, some growth from success
🎭 Culture: Abramovich era impact, Mourinho legacy
🌍 Global: Massive post-2005 growth, especially Asia
🧠 Youth: Recent surge: Mount, James, Gallagher
5. Manchester City (68.4)
🏆 Success: Recent dominance: 9 PLs, 1 UCL
📈 Consistency: Mid-table/lower tier for most of 20th century
👥 Loyalty: Loyal core even pre-takeover, stadium still growing into global pull
🎭 Culture: Pep era, ‘93:20’ Aguero moment, rise of City Football Group
🌍 Global: Rapid expansion in Asia/MENA
🧠 Youth: Foden, Rico Lewis, academy investment
6. Tottenham Hotspur (64.1)
🏆 Success: 8 FA/League Cups, 2 league titles (but dated), UEFA Cup
📈 Consistency: Strong PL presence but long silverware drought
👥 Loyalty: Big home support, loyal national following
🎭 Culture: Jimmy Greaves, Gazza, “Spursy” in pop culture
🌍 Global: North London heritage gives strong US presence
🧠 Youth: Kane, Ledley King, Winks, academy history solid
7. Everton (61.7)
🏆 Success: 9 league titles, 5 FA Cups
📈 Consistency: Third-most top-flight seasons (only 4 relegations)
👥 Loyalty: One-club city, extremely loyal core fans
🎭 Culture: Kendall era, working-class legacy, Dixie Dean
🌍 Global: Less prominent internationally
🧠 Youth: Rooney, Barkley, Rodwell, Gordon
8. Aston Villa (59.9)
🏆 Success: 7 league titles, 1 European Cup
📈 Consistency: Founding club, mid-table regulars
👥 Loyalty: Midlands powerhouse, 1980s peak attendances
🎭 Culture: Clough’s rivals, historic prestige
🌍 Global: Decent in South Africa, legacy club rep
🧠 Youth: Barry, Grealish, current academy promising
9. Newcastle United (57.8)
🏆 Success: 4 league titles (pre-WWII), no major trophy since 1969
📈 Consistency: Frequent yoyo club, but strong spells
👥 Loyalty: Among best attendances in England, fanatical support
🎭 Culture: Geordie identity, entertainers under Keegan
🌍 Global: Potential growing post-takeover
🧠 Youth: Carroll, Dummet, Longstaffs
10. Leeds United (54.3)
🏆 Success: 3 league titles, FA Cup, Fairs Cup
📈 Consistency: Great under Revie, post-2000s patchy
👥 Loyalty: Wildly devoted fanbase, high away support
🎭 Culture: Damned United, working-class underdog aura
🌍 Global: Big following in Scandinavia and Oz
🧠 Youth: Milner, Delph, Smith
📊 Methodology Notes
Trophies weighted by prestige (UCL > League > FA Cup > League Cup > One-offs)
Long-term consistency scored across decades
Fan loyalty included attendances, away support, parades, and OSCs
Culture was semi-qualitative: iconic players, pop culture references, influence
Global reach based on international audience, tours, shirt sales
Youth based on top-level output (not just Premier League)
That’s not a satisfactory conclusion, even for me. Even when the result favoured my bias. I wanted no stone left unturned, so I went back to ChatGPT. I don’t think anyone reading this is interested in the other clubs in the table, as sorry guys, if you are reading this. You’re simply not in the conversation.
So I went back to ChatGPT and said that I wanted a like-for-like comparison between Liverpool and Manchester Utd.
Category | Liverpool Score | Man Utd Score |
Historic Success (35%) | 35.0 | 32.4 |
Competitive Consistency (15%) | 13.0 | 13.2 |
Historic Attendance & Fan Loyalty (25%) | 22.5 | 22.0 |
Cultural Impact & Legacy (15%) | 14.0 | 14.0 |
Global Reach (5%) | 4.0 | 5.0 |
Contribution to Wider Game (5%) | 4.0 | 5.0 |
TOTAL | 92.5 | 91.6 |
Satisfied! Nah, me neither. So I asked for a side-by side comparison in each category.
So we started with historic success. I hope you’ll agree that when deciding which club is the biggest and best, the criteria that should be considered first and foremost is how many competitive trophies each team has won. The weight percentage for each category was decided in collaboration with ChatGPT, the points weighting in terms of prestige, and maths I left entirely up to ChatGPT.
1. Historic Success (35%)
Prestige-weighted trophies since the foundation of modern football in England.Scoring: CL/EC = 10, Domestic League = 8, FA Cup = 6, League Cup = 4, CWC/Super Cup/one-off = 2–3 depending on significance.
Trophy Type | LFC | MUFC | Notes |
League Titles | 20 | 20 | Equal all-time |
FA Cups | 8 | 13 | United lead |
League Cups | 10 | 6 | Liverpool lead |
European Cups / CL | 6 | 3 | Liverpool clear lead |
Europa / UEFA Cup | 3 | 1 | Liverpool lead |
Cup Winners’ Cup | 0 | 1 | United lead |
UEFA Super Cup | 4 | 1 | Liverpool lead |
FIFA CWC / Intercontinental | 1 | 2 | Equal |
Score:
Liverpool: 35.0 / 35
United: 32.4 / 35
Reasoning: Liverpool’s continental dominance (9 major UEFA vs United’s 6) offsets United’s FA Cup advantage. League titles equal, League Cups swing to Liverpool.
As everyone who has used ChatGPT it sometimes gets things wrong. In the initial calculation it missed out Liverpool’s 10th League Cup, and was one shy and both your (remember this is a letter to Mancs) F.A Cup, and one of your CWC’s, Originally United’s final score was 30.5 and Liverpool’s was 34.0, but my promise to myself at the start was to accept the result, whatever it may be. When this revised the overall score, it changed Manchester United from 89.2 to 91.6. And it changed Liverpool’s overall score from 92.5 to 92.5. Eh! Hang on a sec, that doesn’t sound right. What’s going on ChatGPT? My exact phrasing was “Liverpool's score hasn't changed, is that right?”
Yeah, that’s right — Liverpool’s Historic Success score was already sitting so close to the 35-point cap that adding the extra League Cup just tipped it up to the maximum. Because the category’s weighted to max at 35, they couldn’t gain more than that, so their overall total stayed the same at 92.5. United, on the other hand, had room to grow in that category, so their extra FA Cup and extra CWC/Intercontinental bumped their total up, closing the gap.
Right! Fair enough. I guess. Well, I said I wanted to be fair, but it’s not really helping my case here. In another effort of self-sabotage I noticed the absence of Charity/Community Shields, which I thought we were counting, but didn’t appear on the list. I promised fairness, I devised the scoring, the least I could do is be fair about it. So where are they ChatGPT?
For the Community/Charity Shield, I treated it as the very bottom of the prestige ladder — essentially a domestic one-off with far less weight than any cup competition.
I gave it 1 point per win in the raw tally before scaling the totals to the 35-point Historic Success cap.
That way:
It still counts toward “Historic Success” because it’s a recognised senior honour.
But it has a fraction of the influence compared to a league title (8 pts) or Champions League (10 pts).
If we’d completely excluded it, the final table wouldn’t have shifted much — but the idea was to give every official senior trophy some representation, just weighted fairly.
That seems fair, but I didn’t see them represented in the table?
Yeah, that’s because in the summary I gave you earlier I only listed the main prestige-weighted trophies so the table didn’t get bloated, but the Community/Charity Shields were in the background maths that fed the Historic Success score.
They were just rolled into the “one-off game” part of the weighting alongside things like the Super Cup, CWC, and Intercontinental — but at only 1 point each, so they barely move the needle compared to the big trophies.
If you want, I can break out the full raw list for Liverpool and United — including the Charity Shields — so you can see exactly how those 1-pointers, 2-pointers, 4-pointers, 6-pointers, 8-pointers, and 10-pointers stacked before scaling to 35. That’ll make the Historic Success category totally transparent. Do you want me to do that?
Why not? The clearer the better. And Maths hurts my head.
Weighting system recap
Champions League / European Cup – 10 pts
Domestic League title – 8 pts
FA Cup – 6 pts
League Cup – 4 pts
Europa / UEFA Cup – 5 pts
Cup Winners’ Cup – 5 pts
UEFA Super Cup – 3 pts
FIFA CWC / Intercontinental – 2 pts
Community / Charity Shield – 1 pt
Liverpool raw tally
Trophy | Wins | Points each | Raw points |
CL / EC | 6 | 10 | 60 |
League title | 20 | 8 | 160 |
FA Cup | 8 | 6 | 48 |
League Cup | 10 | 4 | 40 |
Europa / UEFA Cup | 3 | 5 | 15 |
Cup Winners’ Cup | 0 | 5 | 0 |
UEFA Super Cup | 4 | 3 | 12 |
CWC / Intercontinental | 1 | 2 | 2 |
Community Shield | 16 | 1 | 16 |
Raw total | 353 |
Manchester United raw tally
Trophy | Wins | Points each | Raw points |
CL / EC | 3 | 10 | 30 |
League title | 20 | 8 | 160 |
FA Cup | 13 | 6 | 78 |
League Cup | 6 | 4 | 24 |
Europa / UEFA Cup | 1 | 5 | 5 |
Cup Winners’ Cup | 1 | 5 | 5 |
UEFA Super Cup | 1 | 3 | 3 |
CWC / Intercontinental | 2 | 2 | 4 |
Community Shield | 21 | 1 | 21 |
Raw total | 330 |
Scaling to 35 points
We scale the raw totals so the highest raw score = 35 in this category.
Liverpool’s 353 → 35.0
United’s 330 → 32.4
As I say, Maths is not my strong point. So I’ll trust the computer here. So, category 1, Historic Success, it’s a win for Liverpool, but we didn’t need artificial intelligence to tell us that.
Another barometer for a big club is consistency. If you’ve gone decades without a single trophy, or even seriously competing then can you really call yourself a big club. Even through Liverpool’s darkest days, in terms of silverware we’ve kept competitive. And off the top of my head, I think since Shankly got us promoted in 1961 we’ve never finished outside the top 8. The weighting on this is significantly less than the category for silverware.
2. Competitive Consistency (15%)
Weighted on % of seasons in top flight, average league finish, and sustained title challenges.
Metric | LFC | MUFC | Context |
Seasons in Top Flight | 110/122 (~90.2%) | 99/122 (~81.1%) | Both have relegations; Liverpool fewer absences |
Avg League Finish (last 50 yrs) | 4.5 | 4.2 | United marginally better |
Longest Top-Flight Run | 61 yrs (1962–2023) | 49 yrs (1975–2024) | Liverpool longer unbroken run historically |
Score:
Liverpool: 13.0 / 15
United: 13.2 / 15
Reasoning: United’s late 20th century dominance slightly boosts them; Liverpool edge long-term presence.
I’m a little peeved that it only counted the last 50 years, as I think over the entirety of the Football League we’d have taken it, given it means ChatGPT only started counting in 1975 missing out the whole of Bill Shankly’s tenure of the club, but equally it means it hasn’t counted Sir Matt’s either. So we may be nitpicking. I’ll let you have this one.
No! Sod it! Points are points. What say you ChatGPT?
You’re right to call that. My consistency calc leaned too hard on the last 50 years, which underweights Busby (’45–’69) and Shankly (’59–’74). That’s on me.
Two fixes:
Era-weighted dominance index I’ve added pre-PL eras so sustained title challenges under Busby and Shankly actually count:
1946–1959, 1960–1979, 1980–1999, 2000–2025. Within each era I score: share of titles, top-2 and top-4 finishes, and average points/finish.
Corrected streak note Liverpool’s top-flight run is 1962–present (still ongoing), not ending 2023. United’s is 1975–present.
What this changes:
When Busby and Shankly eras are properly weighted, the Competitive Consistency gap basically disappears.
Liverpool: 13.3 / 15
Manchester United: 13.3 / 15
Why equal?
United gained from Busby’s 50s–60s dominance plus the Ferguson era.
Liverpool gained from Shankly setting the platform and the sustained 70s–80s domination (Paisley/Dalglish), with modern stability under Klopp/Slot.
If you want, I’ll push this tweak into the sheet and re-post the updated totals. It’ll add +0.3 to LFC and +0.1 to United overall; everything else unchanged.
I think we can leave the adjustment for now. Even if it is in our favour. Moving on.
Without the fans football is nothing. Something that is especially applicable to Liverpool, as we saw in the Pandemic season when without the fans in the stands Liverpool lost against Everton at Anfield ferchrissakes!
3. Historic Attendance & Fan Loyalty (25%)
Combines historic home/away % attendance, parade numbers, and Official Supporters’ Clubs.
Metric | LFC | MUFC | Notes |
Historic Avg Attendance % | High in all divisions | Consistently highest in England | United ahead here |
Parade Attendance (landmark) | 1.5m (2025 title) | 500k+ (1999 treble) | Liverpool ahead |
OLSCs (branches) | 300+ in 100 countries | 334 in 91 countries | United more branches; LFC wider spread |
Score:
Liverpool: 22.5 / 25
United: 22.0 / 25
Reasoning: United’s historic attendance dominance balanced by Liverpool’s exceptional parade turnout and broader global country spread for OLSCs.
I am biased. I won’t deny that, but I’m trying to be as detached as possible in regards to the results that chatGPT is presenting. I could go back to ChatGPT and mention that Old Trafford holds more than Anfield, and we have a far higher waiting list. So much so that last I heard applications have been closed to new applicants? This should definitely be a factor, although I’m sure Manchester Utd have a huge waiting list too. Let’s see if it was already factored in.
No — that Historic Attendance & Fan Loyalty score I gave you earlier didn’t factor in season ticket waitlists at all… Do you want me to run that?
I did, but. I also felt the capacity of Old Trafford wasn’t counted in the attendance metric, I mean obviously Man Utd would have a higher attendance if the capacity was so much higher. So I asked it to factor that in too.
Added metric – Waitlist Ratio
Formula:
Waitlist size÷Stadium capacity×100\text{Waitlist size} \div \text{Stadium capacity} \times 100Waitlist size÷Stadium capacity×100
(Higher % = more demand relative to supply)
Liverpool – est. 70,000 waitlist / 61,000 capacity ≈ 114.7% Manchester United – est. 20,000 waitlist / 74,310 capacity ≈ 26.9%
Historic % Capacity Filled (league games)
Liverpool: 95–100% most seasons since the 1960s, dips only in early 90s. Weighted average ≈ 97.5%.
Man United: 92–100% in most seasons post-1960, but notable dips in early 70s and early 80s. Weighted average ≈ 95%.
Scoring (max 10 points for this sub-metric):
LFC = 9.75 / 10
MUFC = 9.5 / 10
Updated breakdown (25% total weight)
Metric | LFC | MUFC | Notes |
Historic % Capacity | 9.75 / 10 | 9.5 / 10 | LFC marginally higher |
Parade Attendance (landmark) | 10 / 10 | 7 / 10 | Liverpool 2025 vs United 1999 |
OLSCs (branches & spread) | 3.5 / 5 | 3.5 / 5 | United more branches, LFC more countries |
Waitlist Ratio | 2.5 / 2.5 | 0.7 / 2.5 | Huge LFC demand vs MUFC |
Revised category totals
Liverpool: 25.0 / 25
Manchester United: 20.7 / 25
So with capacity adjustment included, Liverpool now max out the fan loyalty category, which makes sense given their consistently full ground, huge waitlist, and massive parade numbers.
So the method in my madness here was to offset the unfairness of having a much higher capacity ground. Also I think the season ticket waiting list is a pretty good marker towards calculating the size of the fanbase. So did it offset it?
Not really, lad — the waitlist is still a much bigger differentiator than the slight attendance % gap.
Here’s why:
The % capacity scores for both clubs are basically neck and neck (9.75 vs 9.5 out of 10) — that’s only a 0.25-point swing in a sub-metric.
The waitlist ratio difference is huge: Liverpool’s is over 4× bigger than United’s when adjusted for capacity, which is a 1.8-point swing in that same category.
So even after giving United their due for Old Trafford’s historic crowd pull, Liverpool’s insane demand (waitlist vs supply) still gives them a decisive edge in fan loyalty overall.
How a club is seen out in the wider world. Do non-football people know who they are? Have they influenced pop culture? Films like Looking for Eric or 51st State, TV shows like Skully and Cracker. I’m not sure whether ChatGPT went that deep, but here are its initial results.
4. Cultural Impact & Legacy (15%)
Weighted by iconic players, managers, pop culture references, media influence.
Iconic players/managers
Liverpool: Dalglish, Gerrard, Rush, Shankly, Paisley, Klopp
MUFC: Charlton, Best, Cantona, Ferguson, Giggs, Ronaldo
Pop culture/media
Liverpool: Films (e.g. The 30-Year Wait), music references, “You’ll Never Walk Alone” as global anthem
MUFC: Films (Class of 92), songs, globally referenced in mainstream sports culture.
Score:
Liverpool: 14.0 / 15
United: 14.0 / 15
Reasoning: Equal score — both are embedded deeply in global football culture.
I mean, I’ll reluctantly accept a draw, but when it comes to football culture, the books, art, films, plays that come from Liverpudlians about the football they’ve seen is unsurpassed. Admittedly I’m mired in that culture, and perhaps if you’re a United fan you have an equal amount of fan made art.
I think of people like Nicky Allt, Peter Etherington, Dave Kirby, Paul Tomkins. All produced books, plays, poems etc about the club. Are there Manchester equivalents? Let’s see!
So I asked ChatGPT: “with regards to the Cultural Impact & Legacy category, did you include stuff like plays One Night in Istanbul, and Beating Burlusconi, books about football from Paul Tomkins and Peter Etherington, or films like 15 minutes that shook the world by Dave Kirby. For example, and obviously any Manchester equivalents if there are any? It seems a plethora of art forms have been spawned, at least in Liverpool. Would you not include these, and is that because it's too local? I'd really like you to find any equivalent Mancunian purveyors too. I don't want to be biased. Do you think it's a worthwhile inclusion or am I weighting things in my favour?”
I did clock those kinds of works in passing when building the Cultural Impact & Legacy category, but I didn’t explicitly score them as separate line items — and you’re right, the Liverpool side has a lot of theatre, literature, and grassroots creative work that springs directly from the club’s culture.
The reason I didn’t break them out was mainly twofold:
Local vs global bias – a lot of these works are highly influential within Liverpool, Merseyside, and the UK fan scene, but they’re not widely known in, say, South America or Asia, whereas Class of ’92 or Beckham documentaries were actively marketed globally.
Consistency across clubs – there’s not as much equivalent creative output tied to United in the theatre/book space, so weighting it heavily would tilt the scale toward Liverpool even if the global cultural footprint ended up equal.
That said — if we’re being brutally honest — ignoring them completely does flatten part of Liverpool’s cultural identity, which is incredibly fertile in music, theatre, books, and indie film. It’s arguably a unique cultural export in its own right even if not all of it is global in reach.
Mancunian equivalents worth noting
If I went looking to balance things, here’s where I’d start:
Film/TV:
United (2011) — BBC film about the Busby Babes and Munich Air Disaster.
Documentaries: Sir Alex Ferguson: Never Give In, Matt Busby: The Impossible Dream.
Class of ’92 doc + follow-up projects.
Books:
Andy Mitten’s works (e.g., The Rough Guide to Manchester United).
Fanzine compilations (United We Stand anthologies).
Autobiographies from Best, Ferguson, Cantona, Keane, Scholes.
Theatre:
Nowhere near Liverpool’s level, but The United Way had live storytelling/retellings attached to some screenings.
Some small-scale plays about Munich or United fan culture have been staged locally, though fewer than Liverpool’s theatre output.
Grassroots art:
Murals of Ferguson, Best, and Cantona in Manchester and beyond.
Fan-led projects around Munich commemorations.
Would including Liverpool’s artistic output weigh things unfairly?
Not necessarily — but you’d have to:
Make it a sub-metric under Pop Culture or Cultural Legacy
Apply the same standard to United
Decide if you’re scoring depth & quality of output (where Liverpool probably wins) or global recognition of the works (where United might claw some back)
If we went down this route, Liverpool might gain +0.1 to +0.2 in this category for sheer breadth of art forms, but United might stay even if we balance with their global reach productions. The final parity could hold, but with a richer rationale for why.
The difference of +0.1 or +0.2 in Liverpool’s favour certainly doesn’t seem worth it, but in for a penny in for a pound.
Cultural Impact & Legacy — now with “Creative Works” (30% of this bucket)
I rebased the 15-point Culture category like this:
Iconic players & managers: 35% → max 5.25
Pop culture & anthems: 25% → max 3.75
Media influence & global recognition: 10% → max 1.50
Creative works (30%): theatre, books, indie films, murals → max 4.50
Creative works I counted (illustrative, not exhaustive)
Liverpool
Theatre/Film: One Night in Istanbul (Nicky Allt), Beating Berlusconi! (John Graham Davies), 15 Minutes That Shook the World (Dave Kirby), Being: Liverpool, The 30 Year Wait, Red or Dead (David Peace, novelised Shankly).
Books/Fanzines: Paul Tomkins’ catalogue (Pay As You Play, The Liverpool Way etc.), Dave Kirby’s work, Fields of Anfield Road oral histories, long-running fanzines (TLW).
Art/Murals: Extensive Anfield/Kop mural culture (Shankly, Paisley, Gerrard, Klopp).
Music: You’ll Never Walk Alone’s adoption and afterlife in wider culture.
Manchester United
Film/TV: United (2011, Busby Babes/Munich), Busby, Sir Alex Ferguson: Never Give In, The United Way (Cantona), Class of ’92 (+ follow-ups).
Books/Fanzines: Andy Mitten’s works, United We Stand anthologies, autobiographies (Best, Ferguson, Keane, Cantona, Scholes, Beckham).
Art/Murals: Best/Cantona/Ferguson murals; Munich memorial culture.
Music/Chants: Glory, Glory Man United and pop-culture normalisation of “United” as the English club abroad in the 90s–00s.
Sub-scores inside Culture (out of 15)
Iconic players & managers (5.25)
LFC 5.0–5.1; MUFC 5.1–5.2 (United shade global name-recognition: Best, Ferguson, Beckham, Ronaldo)
Pop culture & anthems (3.75)
LFC 3.6–3.7 (YNWA + music heritage); MUFC 3.6–3.7 (global TV/film cameos). Call it level.
Media influence & global recognition (1.50)
LFC 1.3–1.35; MUFC 1.4–1.45 (United still the PL’s poster club in the global TV boom years)
Creative works (4.50)
Depth & diversity (local richness): LFC edge
Global recognition (distribution/awards): MUFC competitive via big docs
Net scores: LFC 4.2 / 4.5, MUFC 4.0 / 4.5
Culture totals (rounded)
Liverpool: 14.1 / 15
Manchester United: 14.0 / 15
Does it change the overall table?
Barely. LFC gained ~+0.1 overall. If you keep whole-number rounding, it still reads 14.0 vs 14.0 in Culture and your headline totals don’t move.
Is it fair to include?
Yeah. You’re not gaming it; you’re capturing a real strand of cultural production around the club. To keep it fair I:
Limited it to 30% of the Culture bucket.
Balanced local depth (where LFC thrive) with global reach (where MUFC bites back).
Kept the final difference small (LFC +0.1) so it reflects reality without swamping the category.
This is where I had a crisis of conscience: “It seems to find the bigger club, 10% for media influence and global recognition should be weighted higher, what do you think? And would it make much difference?”
Yeah, I think you’ve got a point lad — that 10% for media influence & global recognition inside the Culture bucket might be a bit low if your aim is to pinpoint the bigger club rather than just the most culturally rich.
Right now, the weighting slightly favours depth (local richness, creative works) over reach. If we bump media influence/global recognition from 10% → 20% (and trim creative works from 30% → 20% to keep the total 100%), you’d be giving more credit to:
Clubs that dominate TV coverage worldwide
Clubs whose brand/players have penetrated non-football media
Global cultural shorthand (e.g. “Manchester United” as the English team in parts of Asia/Africa during the 90s–00s)
Would it make much difference?
I ran a quick mental recalculation:
In that sub-metric, United currently scores ~0.1 -- 0.15 higher than Liverpool.
Doubling its weight adds roughly +0.15–0.3 to United’s overall Culture score.
Across the entire 100-point scale, that’s maybe +0.02–0.04 total — so tiny.
It wouldn’t swing your overall “biggest club” winner unless the scores are razor-close elsewhere, but it would make the Cultural Impact category lean more toward global visibility than local artistic output.
If you want, I can reweight it now and give you the Liverpool vs United Culture breakdown under the 20% media influence model so you can see the shift in black and white.
So after insisting it reverse the weighting, global gets 25% and creative works is given 15% of the total, it ran the numbers again.
Alright, lid — if we tweak the Cultural Impact & Legacy breakdown to:
Iconic players & managers – 35% (unchanged) → 5.25 max
Pop culture & anthems – 25% (unchanged) → 3.75 max
Media influence & global recognition – 25% (up from 10%) → 3.75 max
Creative works – 15% (down from 30%) → 2.25 max
How it changes Liverpool vs United
Media influence & global recognition (3.75 max)
Liverpool: 3.3–3.35
United: 3.55–3.6 → United’s edge is now worth ~0.25 more than before
Creative works (2.25 max)
Liverpool: 2.1–2.15
United: 2.0–2.05 → Liverpool’s edge is still there, but now smaller in effect
New Cultural Impact totals (out of 15)
Liverpool: ≈ 14.05 / 15 (basically unchanged, just redistributed)
Manchester United: ≈ 14.15 / 15 (small net gain due to bigger weight on media reach)
Effect on overall 100-point score
This tweak moves United up +0.1 overall and Liverpool stays almost level. So in a razor-close total table, this could be the nudge that edges them ahead — but otherwise, it’s still marginal.
You can’t say I’m not trying for you Gary! So now we come to Global Reach:
5. Global Reach – 5% weighting
Metrics used:
Historic TV audiences
Shirt sales
Overseas tours
Social media following (proxy for modern engagement)
Liverpool:
Recent global boom since 2018–2022 CL/PL success
Strong markets in Africa, SE Asia
Shirt sales ~2m/year globally
Social media: ~150m followers combined
Score: 4.2/5
United:
Decades-long dominance of shirt sales (still ~3m/year)
Consistent Asia, US tour leaders since 1990s
Social media: ~200m followers combined
Score: 4.4/5
Why United edge it: Earlier and longer-established dominance abroad, particularly in Asia & North America.
After checking the output I realised that 5% is a bit low.
If we bump Global Reach to 10%
United’s +0.2 advantage in this category doubles to +0.4 overall.
It wouldn’t alone flip the final result if Liverpool are ahead by more than ~0.3, but in a tight race it could.
It gives more weight to things like long-term overseas dominance and global visibility, which do matter for “biggest”.
My [i.eChatGPT's] take
If the goal is biggest in the sense the average neutral fan in Asia, Africa, or the US would answer, I’d go 10% weighting for Global Reach.
If the goal is biggest in the sense of balanced, all-round influence in football history, keep it at 5%.
I opted to run the numbers at 10% again, it took from 5% from the Fan Loyalty category. This could end up biting me on the arse.
5. Global Reach – 10% (was 5%)
Liverpool: 4.2 / 5 → 8.4 / 10 → 0.84 weighted
United: 4.4 / 5 → 8.8 / 10 → 0.88 weighted
3. Historic Attendance & Fan Loyalty – 20% (was 25%)
(slight scale-down of the previous scores)
Liverpool: 22.5 / 25 → 18.0 / 20 → 3.60 weighted
United: 22.0 / 25 → 17.6 / 20 → 3.52 weighted
So we come to the 6th and final metric.This is where we see how the two clubs influenced the game with their reserves and academies.
6. Contribution to the Wider Game (Youth Development) – 5% weighting
Metrics used:
Notable academy graduates to top-flight careers
National team impact
Influence of youth systems
Liverpool:
Fowler, McManaman, Owen, Gerrard, Carragher, Alexander-Arnold
Strong local scouting; key England contributors in 90s–2000s
Modern academy producing regular first-teamers
Score: 4.0/5
United:
Busby Babes, Charlton, Edwards
Class of ’92: Beckham, Scholes, Giggs, Neville brothers, Butt
Continuous youth presence in first team since 1937
Rashford, Greenwood, Garnacho in recent years
Score: 4.4/5
Why United edge it: Longer continuous youth pipeline with sustained top-level impact.
Verdict
Liverpool take the overall win 89.5 vs 87.0 due to:
Superior European success
Slightly stronger modern fan engagement & loyalty
Equal cultural impact but more recent big moments
United keep it close with:
Historic league dominance in consistency terms
Earlier and deeper global reach
Slight edge in youth output
It looks like Man Utd edge us on that one, but what does the final breakdown look like, now we’ve taken in the extra data?
Here’s your data in a clean league table format:
Rank | Club | Historic Success (35%) | Competitive Consistency (15%) | Fan Loyalty (20%) | Cultural Impact (15%) | Global Reach (10%) | Wider Game (5%) | Total (/100) | |
1️⃣ | Liverpool | 11.90 | 1.95 | 3.60 | 2.11 | 0.84 | 0.20 | 92.6 | |
2️⃣ | Man Utd | 11.34 | 1.98 | 3.52 | 2.12 | 0.88 | 0.19 | 90.1 |
So there we have it folks, conclusive scientific proof that Liverpool Football Club are the biggest club in the English Top Flight.
Wait a minute, it seems ChatGPT hasn’t done what I asked for in the last category, I wanted to see how youth development at our respective clubs has impacted the footballing pyramid. It won’t make much of a difference either way, but I will put out the result separately. This is long enough already.
So just to reiterate the conclusion: Liverpool F.C are the bi
ggest, and bestest club in the land, and my da could kick your da’s arse!
Comments