Champions League restructuring

[Brend'Watkins]

Perez was moaning that the Champions League Group Stage is boring because the "big teams" don't play each other. I actually agree that it's boring.

Solution: why not get rid of the seeding? You could have Man City, Real Madrid, Juventus and Bayern Munich in Group A and Rosenborg, BATE Barisov, Dinamo Zagreb and Steaua Bucharest in Group B. Pretty much guaranteed that at least one or two of the elite would get knocked out, while plenty of competitors from less-moneyed leagues would have a chance of getting through. Plus more of the big hitters would finish third and go into the Europa League, boosting that cup's profile at the same time. Win-win?

Or scrap the group stage completely. Have a straight knockout tournament where only each countries' respective champions gain entry and call it something like the European Cup...

Oh yes, I'm all for that. But they aren't going to scrap the groups due to money. Next best thing, then, is to take them at their word. They want a more competitive group stage. Fine... get rid of the seeding.

I have probably watched 2 CL games this season.  I have little interest in it.  If it returned to the European Cup as it was I might watch all of it. The draw for the next round of a cup is as, or in some cases, more exciting than the game itself.  The thought of some of the big clubs going out at the first hurdle excites me. 

[cdbearsfan]

It would be considered worse, and would mean that the trophy that has provided most success in the last sixty years of our history, and is realistically our best chance at glory in the next few years, would be rendered not much better than the Windscreen Shield.

There is absolutely no need to fuck about with it. They played twelve group games before, you can accommodate ten group games and the League Cup.

Considered worse by who and why would we care? I just don't agree that Man Utds U23s not being involved in R3 would hugely devalue the cup and if it stops the twats moaning about fixture congestion then I'd be ok with it.

I care. I want our achievements to be recognised for what they are. Winning a tournament in which the top teams don't compete is clearly no longer a major trophy. I have no wish to see the number of major trophies we can likely win halved.

The argument about fixture congestion is absolute nonsense, they play fewer games now than at any time this century. We shouldn't be allowing a few spoiled teams to dictate our tournaments. That's exactly the same sort of logic that saw them try to launch a breakaway Scab League.

[Monty]

If Barcelona and Real Madrid can't manage to budget properly, given how relatively predictable their income is, it really is entirely down to them. They both finish in the top 3 of La Liga every year, it's just a question of which positions the two of them and Atletico finish in the top 3. So they always qualify for the Champions League, and nearly always get to the quarter finals at least, if not the semis. If they then choose to spend more than the income that that stable set of factors allows, well they deserve to go bust.

Yep, the sense of entitlement is mindblowing. If they can't afford to win the Primera Division, then maybe it's time Sevilla win it, or Atletico, or Villareal or whoever.

The craziest thing I've learned recently is that Sevilla haven't won the league since 1946 - Spain's fourth or fifth biggest club, and they're that far from the top. Real and Barca are so used to having it all their own way they perceive winning with this amount of debt as merely just another thing they're owed. Well, they can fuck off as far as I'm concerned, both of them.

[OCD]

Real Madrid's business model is based on debt. If they were ran well, they wouldn't need to pin all their hopes on a European Super League.

[Hockley Lion]

Perez was moaning that the Champions League Group Stage is boring because the "big teams" don't play each other. I actually agree that it's boring.

Solution: why not get rid of the seeding? You could have Man City, Real Madrid, Juventus and Bayern Munich in Group A and Rosenborg, BATE Barisov, Dinamo Zagreb and Steaua Bucharest in Group B. Pretty much guaranteed that at least one or two of the elite would get knocked out, while plenty of competitors from less-moneyed leagues would have a chance of getting through. Plus more of the big hitters would finish third and go into the Europa League, boosting that cup's profile at the same time. Win-win?

Or scrap the group stage completely. Have a straight knockout tournament where only each countries' respective champions gain entry and call it something like the European Cup...

Absolutely this. It defies logic and fairness to have non champions knocking champions of "lower" European league's out. Is it any wonder people are getting bored with the same clubs getting to the last 8.

European Cup, knockout, no seeds for me. That'd mix it up and spread the wealth a bit at least.

[Lastfootstamper]

Perez was moaning that the Champions League Group Stage is boring because the "big teams" don't play each other. I actually agree that it's boring.

Solution: why not get rid of the seeding? You could have Man City, Real Madrid, Juventus and Bayern Munich in Group A and Rosenborg, BATE Barisov, Dinamo Zagreb and Steaua Bucharest in Group B. Pretty much guaranteed that at least one or two of the elite would get knocked out, while plenty of competitors from less-moneyed leagues would have a chance of getting through. Plus more of the big hitters would finish third and go into the Europa League, boosting that cup's profile at the same time. Win-win?

Or scrap the group stage completely. Have a straight knockout tournament where only each countries' respective champions gain entry and call it something like the European Cup...

Absolutely this. It defies logic and fairness to have non champions knocking champions of "lower" European league's out. Is it any wonder people are getting bored with the same clubs getting to the last 8.

European Cup, knockout, no seeds for me. That'd mix it up and spread the wealth a bit at least.

That's the last thing 'they' want!

[algy]

...and as long as they don't scrap the League Cup or reduce the size of the League to accommodate it.

I could live with teams in Europe being removed from the league cup (so long as the winners still get a Europa league place), some people will say it devalues the competition but given those teams all pick reserve teams until at least the QF I don't think this would be any worse.

Bit of a tangent, but back in the 90s my dad ran an elaborate Subbuteo league. That had a cup almost exactly as you describe - every 'league' team in it except for ones that qualified for Europe, with the winner of that cup winning a place in Europe the following season. Guaranteed you'd get some variation in who won trophies & qualified for Europe. That worked really well. Though in that we just had the one 'European Cup', not 3 separate trophies, so the difference between winning that cup & winning the league was minimal.

[algy]

Perez was moaning that the Champions League Group Stage is boring because the "big teams" don't play each other. I actually agree that it's boring.

Solution: why not get rid of the seeding? You could have Man City, Real Madrid, Juventus and Bayern Munich in Group A and Rosenborg, BATE Barisov, Dinamo Zagreb and Steaua Bucharest in Group B. Pretty much guaranteed that at least one or two of the elite would get knocked out, while plenty of competitors from less-moneyed leagues would have a chance of getting through. Plus more of the big hitters would finish third and go into the Europa League, boosting that cup's profile at the same time. Win-win?

Or scrap the group stage completely. Have a straight knockout tournament where only each countries' respective champions gain entry and call it something like the European Cup...

Oh yes, I'm all for that. But they aren't going to scrap the groups due to money. Next best thing, then, is to take them at their word. They want a more competitive group stage. Fine... get rid of the seeding.

Anyway,  I agree with that.  Get rid of seeding and you get rid of huge part of the problem. Absolutely fine with having groups if that's what people want, but the seeding makes them mostly unnecessary as they're heavily weighted in favour of the same teams that qualified the season(s) before.

[Ad@m]

The reality is that the group stage argument from the Real president is just a load of rubbish.  What he really means is that he doesn't want to share the TV money with what he perceives to be lesser clubs and just like Real and Barca have already done to La Liga, he wants to be able to monopolise the TV money in Europe too.

Unfortunately, UEFA are getting in his way which is why he came up with the Super League idea.

[danno]

Seed the eight highest coefficient teams into two groups. That way you have a big group stage game every Tuesday and Wednesday.

Two groups of death!

You'd still have four giant clubs getting to the knockout stages. At the moment because of seeding you can pretty much predict 7/8 of the quarter finalists before a ball is kicked.

Won't happen, but would be worth it just for the hypocritical howls of outrage coming from the dirty dozen.

[Damo70]

The fourteen 'other' Premier League clubs want the six chief executives of 'The big six' who wanted a breakaway to step down and they insist they will not engage in any way with those six.

[KevinGage]

That's not a real sanction, is it.

It'll be a face saving exercise for the clubs involved - if they even go that far.

[Lastfootstamper]

I know we're seemingly being encouraged to be a bit Helen Lovejoy, "Oh, won't somebody please think of the supporters" about this, but I feel more like De Niro's Capone from The Untouchables. Maybe not quite the actual 'dead' bit. Fuck 'em.

[Damo70]

Whether it is politics, military action or football if you are going to instigate a coup make sure you are successful. Because otherwise it will usually end very badly for you.

[Damo70]

I haven't heard any genuine apologies from the top people at the clubs apart from the Liverpool owner.