UEFA ready to discuss European Super League

Thick?

My weight is well proportioned in relation to the rest of my body, judging from your pictures however....

Axeslammer wrote:

Cirque du Barcelona wrote:Imagine a opening day with games like:

Man United vs Milan
Chelsea vs Bayern Munich
Liverpool vs Valencia
Arsenal vs Real
Inter vs Atletico Madrid
Juve vs Porto
Roma vs Borussia Dortmund
Barca vs OM
HSV vs AZ
Lyon vs Celtic

That is mouthwatering, have to admit that

I think its mouthwatering also coz of the novelty. Once this league starts, it will not be mouthwatering for a long time.... and it will take a lot of shine away from domestic leagues.

And its totally unpractical. No team can play so many games. This league will have to be reduced to 10-12 teams. And the domestic leagues will also have to be reduced.

I am not in favour. Things are fine as they are.

Cirque du Barcelona wrote:A Super League will probably sell the TV rights for 3 to 5 times that amount. And they will not share it with the rest of Europe. The rich clubs will share that money between them

Well, look at EPL clubs apart from the Top 4. If they have to play in the second division of the Super League, don´t you think they might lose a lot of money compared to today?

And "poor" clubs like Dortmund, Ajax, AZ etc. would get so much more money than today if they would play in the Super League...where do you think the money will come from? Not from Germany or Dutchieland.

And they will NEVER use the UEFA rankings.

And what will they use instead? Do you think Platini will ask you for a list?

Black Magic wrote:Thick?

Thick indeed.

chrissicross wrote:
And "poor" clubs like Dortmund, Ajax, AZ etc. would get so much more money than today if they would play in the Super League.

Would they really ?

UEFA never has been big on anything resembling fair/equal distribution...

bluenine wrote:

GianDeano Zola wrote:
Laughable...these teams have had mediocre seasons for a while. May aswell chuck Sampdoria in then...we have been in the UEFA Cup for the last few seasons...finishing 5th and 6th during that also.

Ajax are rubbish, even in their own league...and Anderlecht get thumped by anyone outside of Belgium. Why make a Super League when the top 4 Premiership teams will be the top 4 again?

Deano, I think you read too much into the EPL dominance of the CL... English top 4 have mastered the art of CL KO rounds, but that does not mean they would finish top in a league format. For example, I just don't see teams like Liverpool or Arsenal matching Inter in a league format over a whole season.

There is a difference between sides who do better in a league, and who do better in a Cup. Teams like Milan and Liverpool, they seem to rise to the bigger occasion rather well, and have done very well in the CL of late. Teams like Inter, are more made for a long league season, we play with consistency over the season and would drop less points over 38 games than teams like Milan or Liverpool.

On the contrary Bluenine a Super League would be the stuff of Arsene Wenger's dreams. Our style of play suits European football down to the ground and unless teams were to adopt a physical approach we'd wipe the floor with a lot of teams.

Axeslammer wrote:

chrissicross wrote:
And "poor" clubs like Dortmund, Ajax, AZ etc. would get so much more money than today if they would play in the Super League.

Would they really ?

UEFA never has been big on anything resembling fair/equal distribution...

The Bundesliga clubs get around 460m Euro TV money in the next few years. For a midtable club like Dortmund that means maybe 12-15m Euro per season.

If Dortmund would play in a League with an income of a few billion Euro, then I think it´s safe to say that they will get much more money...

chrissicross wrote:

Cirque du Barcelona wrote:A Super League will probably sell the TV rights for 3 to 5 times that amount. And they will not share it with the rest of Europe. The rich clubs will share that money between them

Well, look at EPL clubs apart from the Top 4. If they have to play in the second division of the Super League, don´t you think they might lose a lot of money compared to today?

And "poor" clubs like Dortmund, Ajax, AZ etc. would get so much more money than today if they would play in the Super League...where do you think the money will come from? Not from Germany or Dutchieland.

And they will NEVER use the UEFA rankings.

And what will they use instead? Do you think Platini will ask you for a list?

So? Do you think UEFA or the big clubs care about them? Sure, the clubs outside the big 4 will get less money but the big 4 will get a lot more.

With this plan I don't think domestic leagues will exist anymore. There will be some regional leagues but that's about it. The money will came from all over the world. The tv stations that show Bundesliga, EPL, Serie A, La Liga etc. will pay to show the Superleague.

Platini can't make that list. The big clubs will chose who they like. And the teams must have a big fan base, they must be marketable and they have to have the infrastructure (modern stadiums, etc.).

The other week Platini also told the Dutch & Belgian League should merge. Think that's the Super League.

Even that Supr League will not happen in the next 5 years, let alone the ESL.

Cirque du Barcelona wrote:
So? Do you think UEFA or the big clubs care about them? Sure, the clubs outside the big 4 will get less money but the big 4 will get a lot more.

I don´t know if the UEFA etc. care about it. I just wanted to say that some if not many clubs especially from the EPL will lose (a lot of) money, money that will also go to "poorer" clubs from other leagues then.

Cirque du Barcelona wrote:Platini can't make that list. The big clubs will chose who they like. And the teams must have a big fan base, they must be marketable and they have to have the infrastructure (modern stadiums, etc.).

If the big European clubs would found a league on their own, they can of course chose who ever they like, but I think as soon as the UEFA gets involved things will become much more complicated.

Cirque du Barcelona wrote:My guess is the first top 20 (for the first division) would be:

1.Man United
2.Chelsea
3.Liverpool
4.Arsenal
5.Milan
6.Inter
7.Juve
8.Roma
9.Barca
10.Real
11.Valencia
12.Atletico Madrid
13.Bayern Munich
14.Borussia Dortmund
15.HSV
16.Lyon
17.OM
18.Porto
19.Celtic
20.Ajax

Maybe Benfica or PSV instead of HSV.

Fey, what about countries like Austria or the Czech Republic? Where will they play? Maybe it should be:

North: Scandinavia+Britain
West: Portugal, Spain, France, Belgium, Holland
Central:Germany,Italy+central european countries
South-East: balkans
East: ex-USSR countries

Im not gonna go to Lissbon for a fucking away game on a sunday! Thats just too far away.

There are talks about Holland and Belgium too merge, but most of the fans arent really excited about it.

It's funny how the U.E.F.A are trying to find new ways to change the actual format and it looks like they are doing this because the E.P.L teams are dominating the C.L but football has it cycles and some of the teams winning now won't necessary be winning in 10 years time.

Just a few years ago Spanish teams were dominating both C.L and U.E.F.A and in the late 90's Italian teams were also dominating.

Instead of trying to create a superficial European league the U.E.F.A should try to create rules applicable to all clubs in Europe. Like not allowing clubs having huge debts. I don't understand why some clubs in debt can play like there are no problems what so ever and other clubs have to sell their best players to stabilize their accounts. There should also be more protection for formation and young players transfers.

I'm certainly against the idea of a Superleague that would serve, for the big clubs, to replace domestic league football; I'm more open to the idea of a Superleague that would run alongside domestic league football, but I'm still ultimately against it, at least as it's being proposed.

On the plus side, I think a league format is a greater guarantor of quality - in such a format, the big sides would all play each other every season, and the best teams would come out on top, whereas chance and fortune play a significant part in the Champions League knockout stages. But especially if this Superleague, or Superleague system with tiers, is going to largely stand alone, then it may kill a lot of the excitement that the Champions League currently generates.

The money in football will be focused on this Superleague, and if it is stand-alone and static, largely unrelated to domestic football with just a few teams promoted and relegated each season, it's conceivable that a few teams will just come to dominate - Man Utd vs Juventus, say, will become a somewhat meaningless fixture, as Man Utd establish themselves as one of the league's best teams whilst Juve come to be seen as no more than a solid, mid-table outfit. The glamour of European competition would be lost in this way, and it would be hard to make up for - some teams have long and proud European traditions, but there are few international rivalries that can compete with domestic rivalries with their long, varied histories; and the money in the game today perhaps isn't conducive to the development of meaningful rivalries even in the course of time.

A Superleague system comprising three tiers with sixty clubs or more in total sounds unwieldy. How meaningful would matches between third-tier clubs be - matches between clubs with little European pedigree and with no common history? And because they'd be relatively meaningless fixtures, they'd be the least practical fixtures of all, involving lots of travel but receiving little interest or support.

I'd be more for throwing Champions League qualifiers together quite randomly into two or four large leagues which last much of the footballing season; with the league's winners, or top two, meeting in knockout semi-finals.

Ray Parlour wrote:

bluenine wrote:

GianDeano Zola wrote:
Laughable...these teams have had mediocre seasons for a while. May aswell chuck Sampdoria in then...we have been in the UEFA Cup for the last few seasons...finishing 5th and 6th during that also.

Ajax are rubbish, even in their own league...and Anderlecht get thumped by anyone outside of Belgium. Why make a Super League when the top 4 Premiership teams will be the top 4 again?

Deano, I think you read too much into the EPL dominance of the CL... English top 4 have mastered the art of CL KO rounds, but that does not mean they would finish top in a league format. For example, I just don't see teams like Liverpool or Arsenal matching Inter in a league format over a whole season.

There is a difference between sides who do better in a league, and who do better in a Cup. Teams like Milan and Liverpool, they seem to rise to the bigger occasion rather well, and have done very well in the CL of late. Teams like Inter, are more made for a long league season, we play with consistency over the season and would drop less points over 38 games than teams like Milan or Liverpool.

On the contrary Bluenine a Super League would be the stuff of Arsene Wenger's dreams. Our style of play suits European football down to the ground and unless teams were to adopt a physical approach we'd wipe the floor with a lot of teams.

Probably, but I am comparing Arsenal with Inter over the season and 38 games. Its very unhlikely that Arsenal will be able to maintain a league position over Inter. Milan also flourish on european football, even more so than Arsenal, but its unlikely that they will be able to last 38 rounds over Inter at the mo. Inter are built for the distance, Milan can be more successful on big games but over 38 they will drop too many points. Ditto Arsenal and Liverpool, based on current evidence.

ManU are another team which will probably do very well over 38 games in a superleague...

bluenine wrote:

Ray Parlour wrote:

bluenine wrote:

GianDeano Zola wrote:
Laughable...these teams have had mediocre seasons for a while. May aswell chuck Sampdoria in then...we have been in the UEFA Cup for the last few seasons...finishing 5th and 6th during that also.

Ajax are rubbish, even in their own league...and Anderlecht get thumped by anyone outside of Belgium. Why make a Super League when the top 4 Premiership teams will be the top 4 again?

Deano, I think you read too much into the EPL dominance of the CL... English top 4 have mastered the art of CL KO rounds, but that does not mean they would finish top in a league format. For example, I just don't see teams like Liverpool or Arsenal matching Inter in a league format over a whole season.

There is a difference between sides who do better in a league, and who do better in a Cup. Teams like Milan and Liverpool, they seem to rise to the bigger occasion rather well, and have done very well in the CL of late. Teams like Inter, are more made for a long league season, we play with consistency over the season and would drop less points over 38 games than teams like Milan or Liverpool.

On the contrary Bluenine a Super League would be the stuff of Arsene Wenger's dreams. Our style of play suits European football down to the ground and unless teams were to adopt a physical approach we'd wipe the floor with a lot of teams.

Probably, but I am comparing Arsenal with Inter over the season and 38 games. Its very unhlikely that Arsenal will be able to maintain a league position over Inter. Milan also flourish on european football, even more so than Arsenal, but its unlikely that they will be able to last 38 rounds over Inter at the mo. Inter are built for the distance, Milan can be more successful on big games but over 38 they will drop too many points. Ditto Arsenal and Liverpool, based on current evidence.

ManU are another team which will probably do very well over 38 games in a superleague...

Where you are going wrong here Bluey is not building the nature of these games into your argument. Liverpool for example have had an amazing season against teams who do not just park the bus against them. This also suits arsenal down to the ground. Where both teams struggle is breaking down teams who have the sole intention of defending and this would not happen in such a league

I can agree to a large extent with Bash. However...

The only way to make space in the annual calendar for this league to co-exist with national leagues is to reduce the no of teams in each country's top league to 18 and have for example 4 European league groups of, say, 10 teams (at the same level) each where the top 4 of each would then go on to the last 16 KO stages. I actually quite like the idea in the UEFA cup where you play a team either at home or away but not both. In that case, you need an odd number of teams in each "league" but you reduce the fixture load tremendously whilst allowing a larger amount of teams to partake in the "party".
Also, national cup competitions would have to be condensed to single round KO's or abolished like the League cup.

This means that a team in the latter stages of all competitions could play:
34 national league games
8 national cup games
10 Euro league games
7 euro KO games

that is 59 games, which is do-able and not any more than is the case now.

COTR wrote:

bluenine wrote:

Ray Parlour wrote:

bluenine wrote:

GianDeano Zola wrote:
Laughable...these teams have had mediocre seasons for a while. May aswell chuck Sampdoria in then...we have been in the UEFA Cup for the last few seasons...finishing 5th and 6th during that also.

Ajax are rubbish, even in their own league...and Anderlecht get thumped by anyone outside of Belgium. Why make a Super League when the top 4 Premiership teams will be the top 4 again?

Deano, I think you read too much into the EPL dominance of the CL... English top 4 have mastered the art of CL KO rounds, but that does not mean they would finish top in a league format. For example, I just don't see teams like Liverpool or Arsenal matching Inter in a league format over a whole season.

There is a difference between sides who do better in a league, and who do better in a Cup. Teams like Milan and Liverpool, they seem to rise to the bigger occasion rather well, and have done very well in the CL of late. Teams like Inter, are more made for a long league season, we play with consistency over the season and would drop less points over 38 games than teams like Milan or Liverpool.

On the contrary Bluenine a Super League would be the stuff of Arsene Wenger's dreams. Our style of play suits European football down to the ground and unless teams were to adopt a physical approach we'd wipe the floor with a lot of teams.

Probably, but I am comparing Arsenal with Inter over the season and 38 games. Its very unhlikely that Arsenal will be able to maintain a league position over Inter. Milan also flourish on european football, even more so than Arsenal, but its unlikely that they will be able to last 38 rounds over Inter at the mo. Inter are built for the distance, Milan can be more successful on big games but over 38 they will drop too many points. Ditto Arsenal and Liverpool, based on current evidence.

ManU are another team which will probably do very well over 38 games in a superleague...

Where you are going wrong here Bluey is not building the nature of these games into your argument. Liverpool for example have had an amazing season against teams who do not just park the bus against them. This also suits arsenal down to the ground. Where both teams struggle is breaking down teams who have the sole intention of defending and this would not happen in such a league

Ha ha! You really think so??? Ifyou do, you are either too optimistic, or too naive, probably both.

Believe me, the higher the stakes, the higher the quality, the more defensive the league gets. Serie A was more defensive in its hay day than it is now. EPL has become more and more defensive as its quality has improved over the years. If a superleague is formed, there will be a lot of teams who will play their away games with a strategy to not conceed. A lot more than what you find in EPL at the mo. The modern "defend & counter attack" will become the mantra of the league, with more quality of course. There will be few exceptions, of course, but much less than what you find in EPL right now.

Axeslammer wrote:

GianDeano Zola wrote:
The point is...there is no reason to break up a good competitive league like The Premiership.

(though I have to agree that I can't see a single good reason to break up *any* of the top 10 leagues in Europe )

I mean in the sense that top clubs aren't always guarenteed the points Axe. There are no easy games in the Premiership, and the league is competitive...

I think the whole idea is silly...some CL games bore me tbh.A league full of teams who will be cautious against each other as they won't want to lose...and then ruin a whole load of top european leagues, and football in general. A super league would be the end for everyone else...

You people actually realise some people actually go to football stadiums to watch football???

This Super League will kill the away support! and thus atmosphere. You need two to tango!

Fey wrote:You people actually realise some people actually go to football stadiums to watch football???

This Super League will kill the away support! and thus atmosphere. You need two to tango!

Precisely...certain local derbies ruined, atmosphere ruined...broing continental football, which will see teams play very cautious.

The HuddFather wrote:@ Kas

Even if you had 12 team Euro Divisions with say 2 or 3 tiers that's still 22 games that have to be played + the 36/38 that are exclusive to all domestic top flight competitions now! That's 60 games on the two competitions alone!

Right now it normally takes 13-17 games to win the CL, 17-21 games to win the UEFA Cup. (All depending on how you qualified).

The domestic cups would really suffer the most, managers would start treating the FA Cup even worse, and The League cup would effectively become as important as the FA Trophy (cup competition for lower division sides).

the actual proposals indicated that the league formats would only see each team facing any other team once, like in the UEFA cup group stages at present. That would, IMO, be the only way where it would be feasible.