Most anonymous/generic teams in big leagues

[Elninho]

What clubs best fit the "generic opponent" category? That is, frequently forgotten, rarely noteworthy for being at the top, rarely noteworthy for being in the relegation zone, few or no big rivalries, few or no superstar or supervillian players...

[GoHawks4]

Charlton Athletic.

[Maczebus]

In England - or at least in the top league - it's got to be the current city of my residence - Southampton.

Doing relatively well (for them) at the moment. Ususally floating around mid table or just above the relegation zone.

Few teams in this neck of the woods. Portsmouth, 1 division down (maybe not for long) and Bournemouth - in the 3rd division. No local rivalry to speak of in footballing terms as they don't play each other - But Southampton and Pompey hate each other nevertheless.

Few star players to speak of. LeTissier was a local god but not much past that. And Shearer started his career here.
Pretty much sums it up.

[evilcrossbar]

look below

[evilcrossbar]

Originally posted by Elninho
What clubs best fit the "generic opponent" category? That is, frequently forgotten, rarely noteworthy for being at the top, rarely noteworthy for being in the relegation zone, few or no big rivalries, few or no superstar or supervillian players...

Any team in the MLS. It fits all the categories.

Who's on top? No meaningful league table so it doesn't matter.

No relegation.

No rivalries that compare to anything in Europe, Latin America, Africa, etc.

Ditto for superstars or villans.

The teams are about as generic as McDonalds fast-food. So generic that they seem interchangable.

[Hacienda]

Aston Villa, the world's dullest team. Even with two local rivals in the EPL this season they are still dull.

[skipshady]

Blackburn?

If it weren't for Friedel, most Americans wouldn't care. For the past couple of seasons, they've been comfortably mid-table, I think. They have young players (Duff, Dunn) but they have yet to become superstars. They're the very definition of obscure.

They're remarkable for being remarkably unremarkable.

[Maczebus]

It all depends what time scale we're talking about.
If it's the here and now, then I guess, yes Villa and Blackburn might not be the most dynamic of teams.
But if we're going back a few years Blackburn won the 1995 title and even further back were rather sucessful. Similar can be said of Villa.

For all time non-entityness I still stick by Southampton, were it not for their 1976 'against the run of play' FA cup win, no-one would know anything about them.

[dmar]

In Spain, maybe Racing de Santander, or Valladolid.

[Leto]

Charlton seems like a damn good call....

[skipshady]

Originally posted by maczebus
It all depends what time scale we're talking about.
If it's the here and now, then I guess, yes Villa and Blackburn might not be the most dynamic of teams.
But if we're going back a few years Blackburn won the 1995 title and even further back were rather sucessful. Similar can be said of Villa.

For all time non-entityness I still stick by Southampton, were it not for their 1976 'against the run of play' FA cup win, no-one would know anything about them. While I agree with you for the most part, I wouldn't put Blackburn and Villa in the same league.

Villa has a relatively decent history in Europe and Villa Park is one of the best known stadiums in England, if only because it hosts the odd FA Cup semifinal tie.

Blackburn, at least in the last 20 some years, has very little to distinguish itself and the 1995 title was a mere blip on the radar during Man U's dominance of the Premiership.

But that's just my opinion. And Charlton is probably the most obscure of the London clubs.

[soccernutter]

Originally posted by dmar
In Spain, maybe Racing de Santander, or Valladolid.

I was also thinking Espanyol

[SportBoy321]

France is loaded with anoymous/generic teams Troyes,Sochaux,Rennes,Montpellier,Sedan,Guingamp,Le Harve, Bastia,Ajaccio among others and thats just in League 1. Bastia and Ajaccio do have the Corsican darby but no one outside of a tiny island cares about that.

[Duuuuude]

That's because French league is generic.

[rymannryan]

Originally posted by evilcrossbar
Any team in the MLS. It fits all the categories.

Who's on top? No meaningful league table so it doesn't matter.

No relegation.

No rivalries that compare to anything in Europe, Latin America, Africa, etc.

Ditto for superstars or villans.

The teams are about as generic as McDonalds fast-food. So generic that they seem interchangable.


You obviously don't like MLS but those things take time to develop. In several years true rivalries will exist. As of now, Dallas and Chicago don't like each other, DC and Metros don't either, and there is a great rivalry developing between LA and San Jose in the last two years. As for most generic - for me, the team has to be Kansas City. Even though they won the MLS Cup in 2000, they're still very generic IMO. As for EPL, I'd agree Southampton.

[The Double]

The Jamaican Bobsled Team.

[greatscott]

Originally posted by evilcrossbar


Who's on top? No meaningful league table so it doesn't matter.



I definatly agree with this, MLS has no real table... sure, East and West, what the hell is East and West have to do with soccer? make it one table please!
On to the real question
MLS-Kansas City
EPL- Southampton
Brazil- Palmeiras
Serie A-Como

anyone else agree?

[Elninho]

Como anonymous? At least for now, they're significant for being recently promoted.

How about Udinese?

[minorthreat]

Originally posted by dmar
In Spain, maybe Racing de Santander, or Valladolid. Nah, Racing are at least notorious for being bad. :D

I'll second Valladolid, though. I very frequently forget they're even in the Liga Primera.

[SportBoy321]

I nominate Fulham for most generic right there with Charlton for the most obscure London club. They supposedly have a rich owner and they can't even afford to redevelop their own grounds. Keep playing in another club's outdated 19,000 seat stadium will keep you generic/anonymous.