Just scrap the Europa League and have one big competition. You can't be champions of Europe by winning the Europa anyway as it's not even the top competition.
Champions League to increase to 36 teams from 2024
- Thread starter Berbaclass
- Start date
-
In the latest episode of the United Hour Podcast, Nik and Imran hold a long overdue conversation about United's awful league form with 1 win in 7. They discuss a disappointing draw at Bournemouth, a not so disappointing draw against Liverpool and a crushing defeat at Chelsea - Is time nearly over for Erik Ten Hag?
Then in a special second half of the pod, Nik welcomes Natalie ( https://twitter.com/natalie_17) to discuss the fortunes of Manchester United Women as they booked a place in the FA Cup Final after a historic first ever win vs. Chelsea.
I think this will boost EPL sides and hurt other top leagues.
Elsewhere you get much of a muchness coming in, in England youre bolstering a Leicester or ensuring all the big guns get in. So you have more sides down the table who can say they're in a race for CL and have deeper pockets than the equivalent sides elsewhere so theyll have their pick of the players level below elite.
One more spot can change the dynamic of the league so much.
I think this is the Swiss system setup which actually will be fun.
Just so that people understand how this will go assuming teams are seeded and using teams from this year's group stage and theoretical points in brackets
R1
Bayern vs Lokomotiv
Barca vs Fevencvaros
Liverpool vs Midtjylland
Chelsea vs Rennes
Dortmund vs Brugge
...
Atletico vs Salzburg
Sevilla vs Krasnodar
Leipzig vs Istanbul
R2
Assuming the seeded teams wins
Bayern (3) vs Sevilla (3)
Barca (3) vs Dortmund (3)
Chelsea (3) vs Atletico (3)
Liverpool (3) vs Leipzig (3)
...
Salzburg (0) vs Rennes (0)
R3
Assuming Bayern, Barca win, and Chelsea/Atletico and Liverpool/Leipzig are draws and Salzburg wins
Bayern (6) vs Barca (6)
Chelsea (4) vs Leipzig (4)
Liverpool (4) vs Atletico (4)
Salzburg (3) vs Sevilla (3)
...
Rennes (0) vs Brugge (0)
and so on.
R10
would be something like
Bayern (22) vs PSG (20)
City (21) vs Barca (19)
Liverpool (19) vs Chelsea (19)
Atletico (18) vs Leipzig (17)
United (16) vs RM (16)
...
Istanbul (9) vs Ajax (11)
Rennes (6) vs Brugge(6)
Essentially in the later rounds, the top teams will continue playing each other and the bottom teams each other (and you need to go on a streak to change things).
Just so that people understand how this will go assuming teams are seeded and using teams from this year's group stage and theoretical points in brackets
R1
Bayern vs Lokomotiv
Barca vs Fevencvaros
Liverpool vs Midtjylland
Chelsea vs Rennes
Dortmund vs Brugge
...
Atletico vs Salzburg
Sevilla vs Krasnodar
Leipzig vs Istanbul
R2
Assuming the seeded teams wins
Bayern (3) vs Sevilla (3)
Barca (3) vs Dortmund (3)
Chelsea (3) vs Atletico (3)
Liverpool (3) vs Leipzig (3)
...
Salzburg (0) vs Rennes (0)
R3
Assuming Bayern, Barca win, and Chelsea/Atletico and Liverpool/Leipzig are draws and Salzburg wins
Bayern (6) vs Barca (6)
Chelsea (4) vs Leipzig (4)
Liverpool (4) vs Atletico (4)
Salzburg (3) vs Sevilla (3)
...
Rennes (0) vs Brugge (0)
and so on.
R10
would be something like
Bayern (22) vs PSG (20)
City (21) vs Barca (19)
Liverpool (19) vs Chelsea (19)
Atletico (18) vs Leipzig (17)
United (16) vs RM (16)
...
Istanbul (9) vs Ajax (11)
Rennes (6) vs Brugge(6)
Essentially in the later rounds, the top teams will continue playing each other and the bottom teams each other (and you need to go on a streak to change things).
I think adding more teams lowers the quality of the tournament overall, but gives additional teams that CL/EL money so they can catch up a little bit to the giants.
TL; DR this setup will give a lot more ties between the good teams and will not dilute the competition. It is a good change.
Seems somewhat unnecessary. Groups aren't always great to watch but have been a bit better in recent years. 32 is a nice number of teams like in the World Cup, don't change what's not broken etc.
Will that mean top nations get more places or other nations involved?
Its not like many decent teams are missing out on the CL, it will only mean the competition is somewhat poor.
Its not like many decent teams are missing out on the CL, it will only mean the competition is somewhat poor.
Could this be after the stopping of the away leg? Is there a way of making it balanced instead of away goals etc
The stopping teams from signing players from eachother is really confusing.
More games with the Cup games also added in means these clubs will need like 2-3 full squads......
The single table idea sounds like the European Super League concept basically.
I am intrigued. The group stages are a formality for most big teams anyway, so it’d be nice to freshen things up.
I am intrigued. The group stages are a formality for most big teams anyway, so it’d be nice to freshen things up.
Group stages are boring
I know let’s make it longer
I know let’s make it longer
When I seize power I am firing whoever suggested this idea out of a cannon into the sun
Then I will kick non cha
Then I will kick non cha
There's a spelling error in there.
People who want just knock-out ties are so feckin stupid 
The answer starts with m and rhymes with honey.
CL clubs not selling to each other is utter lunacy. So if you’re a player at a CL club and aren’t starting you HAVE to join an inferior club even if other CL clubs want you? It’ll just mean shorter contracts and higher agent fees.
I see what you did there
I hope so much, it will be something like this. Additionally, it would be good if the bottom teams are relegated/eliminated after 6 or 8 games. This would make the "group or league stage" gather interest opposed to how it is currently, with most top teams securely qualified or eliminated after 4 or 5 games. Use the final league table to seed the knock out tournament to make each game relevant. Make it knock out rounds between the top 16 (only 14 games total compared to 13 currently). Hand out home advantages to the top 8 teams in the last 16 round for extra motivation in the last group games. Quarters to final on neutral ground. Would be a much better competition then now, with a lot less luck involved, especially regarding the group stage.
How to kill football…whoever is advocating these reforms, it's not the people who watch the game. It's not even FOR the people who watch the game (see below). It's advocating a system in which big clubs can bleed the rest more cheaply, seen by people who think that matches only get interesting after 75 minutes are up.
https://www.theguardian.com/footbal...nelli-champions-league-reforms-premier-league
“No triple-figures transfers between Champions League participating clubs maybe would [mean] focusing instead on champion players in smaller countries allowing us only to buy players there,” Agnelli said. “These are elements we are discussing but certainly cost control will be one of the biggest challenges in terms of reforms going forward.”
Agnelli also stressed that football must think of ways to attract younger viewers in an increasingly crowded marketplace. “We could imagine a subscription for the last 15 minutes of a specific game,” he said. “The attention span of today’s kids and tomorrow’s spenders is completely different to the one I had when I was their age.
“If you take golf, if it’s interesting at all, it’s only the last six holes on the final day. You are not going to watch the whole thing on the TV unless you are a hardcore fan.”
https://www.theguardian.com/footbal...nelli-champions-league-reforms-premier-league
“No triple-figures transfers between Champions League participating clubs maybe would [mean] focusing instead on champion players in smaller countries allowing us only to buy players there,” Agnelli said. “These are elements we are discussing but certainly cost control will be one of the biggest challenges in terms of reforms going forward.”
Agnelli also stressed that football must think of ways to attract younger viewers in an increasingly crowded marketplace. “We could imagine a subscription for the last 15 minutes of a specific game,” he said. “The attention span of today’s kids and tomorrow’s spenders is completely different to the one I had when I was their age.
“If you take golf, if it’s interesting at all, it’s only the last six holes on the final day. You are not going to watch the whole thing on the TV unless you are a hardcore fan.”
If anything they should decrease not increase.
Probably just means that the new signings won't be allowed to play in the CL for an extended period of time.
No way the top clubs will allow a ban on signing players.
It's only good if we bin the Europa league at the same time.
I am in support for the CL reform.
With UEFA has a hand in choosing the guaranteed 10 games (somehow), it sounds like they go hard in keeping the big boys in the competition as long as possible, while giving chances for big boys clashing more often, without eliminating each other like in the KO phase. Sound like Super League but with the obligated participation of fodder clubs.
The whole idea is to lessen the boring group phase where some groups it is the death group, while some others are boring routine. Big clubs would clash more against each other, while given the chance to ensure their qualification for next round against fodders. Fodders would be fed to big boys, instead of playing more against each other and increase their odd to qualify for next round.
How they're gonna tune this up is up in the air. With UEFA system, there are too many fodders from the smaller leagues to filter through.
With UEFA has a hand in choosing the guaranteed 10 games (somehow), it sounds like they go hard in keeping the big boys in the competition as long as possible, while giving chances for big boys clashing more often, without eliminating each other like in the KO phase. Sound like Super League but with the obligated participation of fodder clubs.
The whole idea is to lessen the boring group phase where some groups it is the death group, while some others are boring routine. Big clubs would clash more against each other, while given the chance to ensure their qualification for next round against fodders. Fodders would be fed to big boys, instead of playing more against each other and increase their odd to qualify for next round.
How they're gonna tune this up is up in the air. With UEFA system, there are too many fodders from the smaller leagues to filter through.
Greedy owners/investors want a steady return on investment. They don't care about quality and competitiveness of football. It is the Americanization of European football.
When champions of the smaller countries have to go through qualifying to get into the group stages whereas the second and third teams from bigger leagues get straight through to the group stages its a farce. How can 4 teams from Italy Spain Germany England all be champions? They should go back to calling it the European Cup.
Eventually it will end up turning into the Nations League.
The bigger teams will always qualify as the tournament is geared towards them. The smaller teams should have all the advantages and the bigger teams should be made so it harder for them, would add more entertainment to the whole thing.
Just about every year its the same teams through to the last 16 bar one or two surprises. Getting boring tbh
Eventually it will end up turning into the Nations League.
The bigger teams will always qualify as the tournament is geared towards them. The smaller teams should have all the advantages and the bigger teams should be made so it harder for them, would add more entertainment to the whole thing.
Just about every year its the same teams through to the last 16 bar one or two surprises. Getting boring tbh
Last edited:
I think it's the opposite. Majority of pedigree clubs would be happy with this ban. This is clearly the answer to Barcelona - PSG - Neymar saga. What this does is to protect the old guys from the new rich kid on the block. It gives chance for emerging teams to build. For example: AC Milan is a shell of their past where they are a big spender. In the long run, it can happen to even Barcelona (look like it's already on), Juventus, Real Madrid, Bayern... would eventually lose to newer and richer sugar daddies' clubs if this keeps happening as more rich men/states would enter the game.
For example, Monaco would be able to retain a strong team after winning Ligue 1. Since CL clubs can't buy Mbappe, Bernardo Silva, Carrasco, Bakayoko... from them the following seasons when they still qualify for CL, they have time to build themselves up with their good structure. One season wonder clubs despite having another year in CL to build, it wouldn't amount to much since their successes was based more on an odd season. Everyone are fairly given a chance to keep their players for at least a season which is a good thing.
The way out for clubs hoppers would be shorter contract, so these players would be able to leave as free agent the soonish if thing doesn't work out well. With shorter contract, clubs would be easier to be persuaded to sell (to smaller clubs) to keep some value. This should make players be more mindful about their choice of club, and contract extension. Should help reducing the talent hoarding scheme. If you're serious about winning things instead of money from the new sugar daddy clubs, you would think twice about joining them in the first place, since there is no way out unless taking a detour for a year in non CL teams, and with it a lot of work for 2 different transfer.
Last edited:
That actually makes sense since the competition is called you know... a Champions League. But the only league part is just a couple of games during the group stages. It's an interesting way to mix it up that's for sure, but personally I don't see how the smaller teams will be able to compete with the "Big Boys" in a league.
While you can get away with a smash and grab over a 2 legged affair, I don't think we'll be able to see a Porto, Monaco or even a Spurs in the CL final any time soon.
As long as the top teams play each other and the small teams get easier matches in all for this
They've got to really consider how many teams make it into the knockouts.
Earlier reports were talking about 24 teams. That would destroy the competition as many teams would qualify after 5 or 6 of their 10 matches and would put out B teams for the remainder. Or they'd put weaker teams out throughout, confident that a sub-par performance would still get them through regardless (which to be fair, SAF used to do in the current system, sometimes failing)
Earlier reports were talking about 24 teams. That would destroy the competition as many teams would qualify after 5 or 6 of their 10 matches and would put out B teams for the remainder. Or they'd put weaker teams out throughout, confident that a sub-par performance would still get them through regardless (which to be fair, SAF used to do in the current system, sometimes failing)
I think they need to rebrand the name of this competition.......Champions League should have only domestic champions in the competition.
European Super League is probably a lot more fitting.
European Super League is probably a lot more fitting.
That argument is so ridiculous.
What is the Champions League?
It's the league that all the best teams go into.
Including the Champions?
Yes, Including the Champions.
Seems well named to me.
A champions' league doesn't mean a league that happens to include champions. If so, then every league in the world, in every continent is its own champions' league.
The precursor to this modern format was a cup competition in which only champions qualified, and @Bondi77 and many others feel that "champions League" is a misnomer if it includes 4th and 5th placed teams that were never crowned champions.
Funnily enough the CONCACAF Champions League, at this point, doesn't have league stage. Just the cup.
But yeah, it's still a silly argument. No one's confused by it. The 53 champions of the 53 European leagues go into the Champions League. The very best leagues also get additional spaces for a few more of their best teams.
Does the Europa League get any Champions? Not automatically, only cup winners, not league winners. Champions can fall into it but only if they lose and are therefore not champions.
The Champions League is for the very best team in Europe fighting to be Champions of Europe.
The Europa League is for the nothings of Europe fighting to be the Nothing of Europe
We seem to have digressed. Nobody mentioned the Europa League and Bondi didn't claim that the Europa League has any legitimate claim to being a "champions' league".
Nobody is confused here. They're just debating whether the name of the competition makes sense. Bringing CONCACAF and the Europa League into a discussion about the validity of the competition's name might indicate that it's you who is a little confused, ironically.
I'm digressing because it's boring subject brought up millions of times on this forum.
I do worry about those that thing it's confusing name though.
Not entirely sure I follow, but I understand your main point. It's been debated so often that it's tedious.
I hope that the current change is a good one, and that remains to be seen.
This is great, they can also set up a bi-weekly presser for all coaches where they moan about the busy schedule.
It‘s an nfl version of the champions league.