Europa Conference League

[do.ob]

I think many non english clubs will enjoy this tournament. The likes of Union Berlin and other clubs from eastern europe will try to win the competition. At the end of the day it is a European trophy. Presents a good opportunity for clubs to get hands on it.

Clubs like Union can't afford to take this seriously. On paper their squads are barely good enough to compete in their domestic competition as it is. The ECL is a competition that demands you to travel to the ends of Europe midweek instead of resting and prepping for their next opponent, while basically not paying them a cent to bolster their squad depth. Having to play in it probably increases their odds to be relegated quite a bit. A club like Spurs on the other hand can probably win most games with a heavily rotated squad.

 

[crossy1686]

If you introduce a maximum wage cap for the EL and then deny teams a place in that competition despite qualifying on sporting merit. Do you then think the CL should also have a minimum wage cap?

Because if you bring wage brackets into the qualifying criteria for European competitions that's where it could lead. If United have no place in the Europa because our wage bill is so big then what business does a team from Eastern Europe or Scandanavia with a relatively tiny wage bill have competing against United, City, Real or Barca in the Champions League?

No, the best teams from those leagues should qualify for the CL but those teams should be put in the same groups in the group stage based on their wage bill. There's nothing in it for those teams being lumped in with 3 teams who are miles better. At least if a couple of them get to the knockouts anything could happen. Same for the big boys, stick Bayern, United, Madrid and Juventus in the same group. Tough shit for two of those teams but it's better than giving each of them a seeded place and a free ride to the quarters which is when the CL finally gets interesting.

 

[rotherham_red]

Does anyone remember what the old system was? I know the CL was for the champions only until 1998, and until 1999, the FA Cup (or FA Cup-equivalent) winners entered the Cup Winners Cup.

Which teams entered the UEFA Cup? I'm trying to find the answer but Google doesn't seem able to help.

I have a very vague recollection of those years - 96/97 was my first season where I got into football, but my recollections around that period of time are pretty hazy. I remember Chelsea's CWC win, I remember our Treble obviously, and I remember the Scousers' mickey mouse treble, but I can't remember the old system to qualify for the UEFA Cup.

 

[stevoc]

No, the best teams from those leagues should qualify for the CL but those teams should be put in the same groups in the group stage based on their wage bill. There's nothing in it for those teams being lumped in with 3 teams who are miles better. At least if a couple of them get to the knockouts anything could happen. Same for the big boys, stick Bayern, United, Madrid and Juventus in the same group. Tough shit for two of those teams but it's better than giving each of them a seeded place and a free ride to the quarters which is when the CL finally gets interesting.

So skewing the competition based on clubs turnover/wage bills and not on sporting merit?

 

[crossy1686]

Does anyone remember what the old system was? I know the CL was for the champions only until 1998, and until 1999, the FA Cup (or FA Cup-equivalent) winners entered the Cup Winners Cup.

Which teams entered the UEFA Cup? I'm trying to find the answer but Google doesn't seem able to help.

I have a very vague recollection of those years - 96/97 was my first season where I got into football, but my recollections around that period of time are pretty hazy. I remember Chelsea's CWC win, I remember our Treble obviously, and I remember the Scousers' mickey mouse treble, but I can't remember the old system to qualify for the UEFA Cup.

The first round qualifiers for the UEFA cup started in July, and there was no group stage, just knock out games.

How each team qualified for the place of its starting round:

• Title holders
• League Cup winners
• League position
• Intertoto Cup winners
• Fair play
• Losers from the Champions League second qualifying round

In 98-99 the English teams that qualified were:

Liverpool (3rd), Aston Villa (fair play), Blackburn (6th), Leeds, (5th).

 

[crossy1686]

So skewing the competition based on clubs turnover/wage bills and not on sporting merit?

If teams still qualify by sporting merit how does it matter how they're grouped in the competition? Why should Madrid or Bayern, or United get a free ride to the quarters at the expense of other teams with smaller budgets?

 

[stevoc]

Does anyone remember what the old system was? I know the CL was for the champions only until 1998, and until 1999, the FA Cup (or FA Cup-equivalent) winners entered the Cup Winners Cup.

Which teams entered the UEFA Cup? I'm trying to find the answer but Google doesn't seem able to help.

I have a very vague recollection of those years - 96/97 was my first season where I got into football, but my recollections around that period of time are pretty hazy. I remember Chelsea's CWC win, I remember our Treble obviously, and I remember the Scousers' mickey mouse treble, but I can't remember the old system to qualify for the UEFA Cup.

Before they let 2nd place teams into the CL. If I remember correctly the champions went into the CL obviously, FA Cup winners went into the CWC and the League cup winners plus the 2nd (and possibly 3rd) placed league team went into the Uefa cup.

 

[MU655]

Does anyone remember what the old system was? I know the CL was for the champions only until 1998, and until 1999, the FA Cup (or FA Cup-equivalent) winners entered the Cup Winners Cup.

Which teams entered the UEFA Cup? I'm trying to find the answer but Google doesn't seem able to help.

I have a very vague recollection of those years - 96/97 was my first season where I got into football, but my recollections around that period of time are pretty hazy. I remember Chelsea's CWC win, I remember our Treble obviously, and I remember the Scousers' mickey mouse treble, but I can't remember the old system to qualify for the UEFA Cup.

1st place Champions League

2nd to 5th got Uefa Cup

In 94/95, that was the case.

 

[rotherham_red]

The first round qualifiers for the UEFA cup started in July, and there was no group stage, just knock out games.

How each team qualified for the place of its starting round:

• Title holders
• League Cup winners
• League position
• Intertoto Cup winners
• Fair play
• Losers from the Champions League second qualifying round

In 98-99 the English teams that qualified were:

Liverpool (3rd), Aston Villa (fair play), Blackburn (6th), Leeds, (5th).

Thanks mate.

Strange how the 2nd team didn't place themselves in the competition, and how the 4th placed team seemingly missed out in favour of the 5th and 6th placed teams.

I think, if UEFA was serious about reforming the competitions, they should make the CL for the champions only and then the 2nd-4th placed teams entered the EL. And bring back the Cup Winners Cup.

Of course, it will never happen, but it would have been nice to see at least two high quality competitions in Europe. Though in saying that, next year's version of the EL looks like it could be an interesting one to watch as a neutral with quite a few teams who more than a little decent.

 

[rotherham_red]

1st place Champions League

2nd to 5th got Uefa Cup

In 94/95, that was the case.

Before they let 2nd place teams into the CL. If I remember correctly the champions went into the CL obviously, FA Cup winners went into the CWC and the League cup winners plus the 2nd (and possibly 3rd) placed league team went into the Uefa cup.

Thanks guys

 

[crossy1686]

Thanks mate.

Strange how the 2nd team didn't place themselves in the competition, and how the 4th placed team seemingly missed out in favour of the 5th and 6th placed teams.

I think, if UEFA was serious about reforming the competitions, they should make the CL for the champions only and then the 2nd-4th placed teams entered the EL. And bring back the Cup Winners Cup.

Of course, it will never happen, but it would have been nice to see at least two high quality competitions in Europe. Though in saying that, next year's version of the EL looks like it could be an interesting one to watch as a neutral with quite a few teams who more than a little decent.

So it seems Chelsea finished 4th but they qualified for the cup winners cup instead, so 7th place got their UEFA cup place, which also happened to be Villa so they qualified on two different criteria.

Newcastle also qualified for the cup winners cup but finished 13th.

And Palace who finished 20th and was relegated qualified for the Intertoto Cup?

 

[roonster09]

This conference league might be too much for smaller clubs. Financial reward is poor in Europa, so Conference should be even worse. Smaller clubs don't have big squads, the one advantage they had over big clubs was, they had one game per week most of the time, so they had lot more preparation time and the squad had proper rest to have a go at big teams. With this conference league, even that advantage is gone.

 

[stevoc]

If teams still qualify by sporting merit how does it matter how they're grouped in the competition? Why should Madrid or Bayern, or United get a free ride to the quarters at the expense of other teams with smaller budgets?

Flip the question mate and you'll see where that thinking leads to.

Why should Ferencvaros, Istanbul, Mitdjylland get a free ride to the quarters at the expense of teams with bigger budgets?

Once you bring budgets into the mix for seeding how long before enough big clubs think they should qualify every year regardless of their league finish. That sort of thinking lead to the Super League, football was against that concept as it overruled sporting merit. So it would/should be equally opposed to the idea of organizing European competitions based on wage bills.

 

[stevoc]

So it seems Chelsea finished 4th but they qualified for the cup winners cup instead, so 7th place got their UEFA cup place, which also happened to be Villa so they qualified on two different criteria.

Newcastle also qualified for the cup winners cup but finished 13th.

And Palace who finished 20th and was relegated qualified for the Intertoto Cup?

They were the only English team who wanted to play in it.

Chelsea qualified for the CWC as they were the holders.

 

[crossy1686]

Flip the question mate and you'll see where that thinking leads to.

Why should Ferencvaros, Istanbul, Mitdjylland get a free ride to the quarters at the expense of teams with bigger budgets?

Once you bring budgets into the mix for seeding how long before enough big clubs think they should qualify every year regardless of their league finish. That sort of thinking lead to the Super League, football was against that concept as it overruled sporting merit. So it would/should be equally opposed to the idea of organizing European competitions based on wage bills.

Yeah I get that, but the current system is broken and it rewards the rich clubs and keeps them rich.

If we're talking a genuine elite competition that the CL advertises itself as, those teams shouldn't even qualify really, a team like Leicester or Tottenham are better placed to make a decent go of it in the CL over Mitdjylland, but I also feel the weighting of qualifying clubs doesn't factor in relative league strength. I'm also not saying finishing 7th in the PL should be rewarded but when you look at who qualified it's hard to argue a case where Mitdjylland don't finish in the bottom half in the PL or La Liga.

Then these clubs get dumped out of the competition and get sent home with £5m for showing up. If they're going to qualify we might as well give them the chance to take some big bucks home and come back with a better squad next year. Here's £30m for making it to the knockouts, then next year when they've improved all of a sudden they're not in the bottom group anymore, wage budget has increased and all that. That at least gives them a fighting chance of doing something meaningful.

 

[crossy1686]

They were the only English team who wanted to play in it.

Chelsea qualified for the CWC as they were the holders.

You could decide if you wanted to participate? Mental

 

[TheReligion]

This is one of the stadiums apparently

Tweet

— Twitter API (@user) date

 

[Bertie Wooster]

If you introduce a maximum wage cap for the EL and then deny teams a place in that competition despite qualifying on sporting merit. Do you then think the CL should also have a minimum wage cap?

Because if you bring wage brackets into the qualifying criteria for European competitions that's where it could lead. If United have no place in the Europa because our wage bill is so big then what business does a team from Eastern Europe or Scandanavia with a relatively tiny wage bill have competing against United, City, Real or Barca in the Champions League?

So skewing the competition based on clubs turnover/wage bills and not on sporting merit?

Flip the question mate and you'll see where that thinking leads to.

Why should Ferencvaros, Istanbul, Mitdjylland get a free ride to the quarters at the expense of teams with bigger budgets?

Once you bring budgets into the mix for seeding how long before enough big clubs think they should qualify every year regardless of their league finish. That sort of thinking lead to the Super League, football was against that concept as it overruled sporting merit. So it would/should be equally opposed to the idea of organizing European competitions based on wage bills.

I completely agree with these. And I'd said similar in an earlier post.

It seems another one of these modern days 'punching up v punching down' double standards.

Quite rightly there was outrage at the SL suggestion - and full agreement that European qualification should be based on league positions and not on clubs benefiting based on their size or history. That was when big clubs were suggesting 'punching down' and hurting smaller clubs.

Yet some are now happy to go against all of that 'European places must be earned on merit by league positions' if the rule change is 'punching up' and sees smaller teams 'unfairly' (if the 'fair' criteria is league position) rewarded at the expense of bigger teams.

The 'league position (or Cup success) decides Euro qualification' is the right way to go about it, as was almost unanimously agreed upon when the SL was the topic. It's complete hypocrisy if there's any kind of a movement for banning 'big and successful' clubs who finished higher in leagues from qualification just because they might win the competition.

 

[Lay]

So it seems Chelsea finished 4th but they qualified for the cup winners cup instead, so 7th place got their UEFA cup place, which also happened to be Villa so they qualified on two different criteria.

Newcastle also qualified for the cup winners cup but finished 13th.

And Palace who finished 20th and was relegated qualified for the Intertoto Cup?

I think the intertoto cup was optional. I might be wrong but fair play winners also qualified for the intertoto

 

[Wilt]

You are spot on.

It's mostly fans of elite level sides complaining about this which is hilarious as it's not intended for them or their clubs and 99% of the time will be totally irrelevant to them. Not everything has to be about you and you don't have to have an opinion on everything from your tunneled and privileged perspective.

Same as people moaning about the already packed schedule, well it's not going to add more games to a Real Madrid or a Bayern Munich, it's a totally moot point.

Yep this.

 

[stevoc]

You could decide if you wanted to participate? Mental

It was only a pre-season tournament for teams to get a chance to qualify for the Uefa Cup.

Uefa were just happy that teams turned up at all.

 

[stevoc]

Yeah I get that, but the current system is broken and it rewards the rich clubs and keeps them rich.

If we're talking a genuine elite competition that the CL advertises itself as, those teams shouldn't even qualify really, a team like Leicester or Tottenham are better placed to make a decent go of it in the CL over Mitdjylland, but I also feel the weighting of qualifying clubs doesn't factor in relative league strength. I'm also not saying finishing 7th in the PL should be rewarded but when you look at who qualified it's hard to argue a case where Mitdjylland don't finish in the bottom half in the PL or La Liga.

Then these clubs get dumped out of the competition and get sent home with £5m for showing up. If they're going to qualify we might as well give them the chance to take some big bucks home and come back with a better squad next year. Here's £30m for making it to the knockouts, then next year when they've improved all of a sudden they're not in the bottom group anymore, wage budget has increased and all that. That at least gives them a fighting chance of doing something meaningful.

I get what you're saying mate but as soon as you use wage bill as a criteria you open up Pandoras box that will only lead down one path.

The CL is in the state it is because UEFA have been trying to stave off a European Super League for 20-30 years. They've caved in to big clubs demands time and time again to keep themselves in power and earning their piece of the pie.

 

[SAFMUTD]

Just read about this tournament, surely the worst idea ever to include teams from top leagues? I mean it's seen more as a punishment than a reward to end up participating in it.

The revenue will be hardly anything considerable and adding fixture congestion for a worthless trophy is not the greatest news. I can perfectly imagine top teams sending their C team hoping they get eliminated soon so they can focus on the important tournaments.

 

[stefan92]

Just read about this tournament, surely the worst idea ever to include teams from top leagues? I mean it's seen more as a punishment than a reward to end up participating in it.

The revenue will be hardly anything considerable and adding fixture congestion for a worthless trophy is not the greatest news. I can perfectly imagine top teams sending their C team hoping they get eliminated soon so they can focus on the important tournaments.

That's absolutely true, but on the other hand this gives team from other leagues a real opportunity to beat a team with a big name. I'm not sure it make the whole thing worth it but I could imagine this to be an interesting opportunity for some teams.

 

[SAFMUTD]

That's absolutely true, but on the other hand this gives team from other leagues a real opportunity to beat a team with a big name. I'm not sure it make the whole thing worth it but I could imagine this to be an interesting opportunity for some teams.

When you see the list of the teams participating in it I mean no disrespect but we are talking about teams that are 4th-5th best in low leagues. Teams from top 5 leagues will toy with them. Sure as you say they may get an odd result here and there but I think this competition won't last for long. Not in the current format at least.