It is two groups of 10, don't forget. I expect Chelsea, the 8 chosen whipping boys and one of Arsenal/Spurs/Milan to be in the same group.
Would the Super League be a success?
- Thread starter Zehner
- Start date
-
In the latest episode of the United Hour Podcast, Nik @Rood and Imran @Annihilate Now! start with the good news by celebrating Manchester United Women's emphatic FA Cup win over Spurs at Wembley and the future of manager Marc Skinner.
Then it's the bad news and the ever worsening form of our Men with losses to Arsenal and Palace.
Finally the main debate - ETH Out now or keep him until the end of the season - if not longer. Are you Team Nik or Team Imran?
What's this nonsense about the players not being able to play the WC/EC/CA? Does anyone buy that drivel? Would take some dodgy laws introducing that.
That's not an argument, no trophy had history on its first edition. By that logic no competition should have been played for the first time.
Spurs will be given more than a fair chance and they'll still blow it. Cos, Spurs.
That is the history of the Tottenham!
I don't see it happening. Most social causes die off in a month or two. People lose interest. Would get busy with things in life
feck them and their success, dont want it.
I think it'll be awful for several reasons
1. They won't get 20 teams, they can't even get 15 founder clubs. Who is going to want to join for one season, derail their domestic competitions, and then get relegated even if they outperform some of the founding clubs?
2. These owners will run the competition and they don't understand what makes football appealing. They'll encourage ad breaks, shorter halves (maybe quarters), and god knows what else
3. The football won't be high level, without the history of the competition and core fan support, the players won't be as motivated to play. And halfway through the league sage there'll be a lot of dead rubbers. Overall, I predict it'll be exhibition quasi-friendly football
4. Finally, for Man United it'll be dreadful. The Glazers aren't going to reinvest most of the money and if they do they'll spend it badly on 'star names' that don't formulate a winning team. We'll likely spend the next decade as a permanent bottom-half Super League team losing most of our games and the owners won't care at all.
1. They won't get 20 teams, they can't even get 15 founder clubs. Who is going to want to join for one season, derail their domestic competitions, and then get relegated even if they outperform some of the founding clubs?
2. These owners will run the competition and they don't understand what makes football appealing. They'll encourage ad breaks, shorter halves (maybe quarters), and god knows what else
3. The football won't be high level, without the history of the competition and core fan support, the players won't be as motivated to play. And halfway through the league sage there'll be a lot of dead rubbers. Overall, I predict it'll be exhibition quasi-friendly football
4. Finally, for Man United it'll be dreadful. The Glazers aren't going to reinvest most of the money and if they do they'll spend it badly on 'star names' that don't formulate a winning team. We'll likely spend the next decade as a permanent bottom-half Super League team losing most of our games and the owners won't care at all.
It might succeed if they pledge never to use VAR.
I feel they are underestimating the international fan (I'm one also). Most are serious football fans with domestic leagues in their own country and also play/played amateur leagues.
This closed shop thing won't be attractive to them either
This closed shop thing won't be attractive to them either
I don't see it, that would insinuate that the post would be without potential big fixtures. My guess would be the Barcelona and Barcelona wouldn't be in the same group that way it allows a potential clasico in final and probably the same with Liverpool and United.
What gets ignored in this context, I believe, is the brand. Why are these teams such big brands in the first place? Because they dominate their leagues, year in year out. The appeal of the CL is that it's also a comparisons of leagues: We see Bayern doing well in the Bundesliga and City doing well in the Premier League but who's the better team, pound for pound?
The construct of having four more or less equal European top leagues is actually a very profound platform to build strong brands since each league has enough room for 2-3 top clubs. If there's only one league and every other national league pales in comparison, then there will be fewer champions. So even if a club like Arsenal grows financially, their brand might suffer because they'll be spanked left, right and center. And they'll lose the support of their fans as well as the interest of neutrals.
Moreover, I don't really understand what's the advantage of the league marketing-wise over, say, the EPL. I get that they want to appeal to Asian and American audiences and I get that there's much underutilized potential when I compare the annual revenues of the biggest football leagues with the MLB or NFL. But why is that the case now? As far as I know, all top clubs are trying to mobilize Asia for years. It was one of the reasons why the WC 2002 was given to Japan and Korea. If the revenue numbers are so much behind the MLB and NFL, why would that suddenly change due to a European Super League? Why would that product be so much more appealing to them than the EPL or the CL?
I was just joking with Chelsea's ridiculously good luck of having easy matches.
With the amount of money involved in the super league, it won't be a success on day 1 but given time it will probably cause the other football competitions to financially collapse. The global appeal of the champions league is way less if you take away those 12 clubs. TV and sponsorship money will eventually dry out for the current competitions.
To be a fan in America/Asia, you really need to be a night creature. For the first time, they can move games to cater for these markets, and they will.
Why? These tournaments aren't organized by states or anything, nobody has a right to play them. People forget the representations of the countries are actually just institutions part of the UEFA/FIFA. And if they expel these players because they play for expelled clubs, they can't participate.
Don't take for granted that there's one big tent under which all of football comes together. This tent is called FIFA, no matter how corrupt it was, and it is currently under attack. If this goes through, there could be two parallel WC titles, like in boxing or something like that.
Yeah, bankers and marketing geniuses have never screwed anything up so this idea is rock solid.
I believe most are actually overestimating the Asian and American market role in the success of this endeavour, it would still be European or Domestic audience which would make or break this if it gets off the ground .
Just to add further though the overwhelming consensus seems to be against it on here and within local supporters of the Club's ,I would still be wary of taking that as actual representation of their behaviour if this actually comes to fruition.
I think the funding model is presumptuous. I think the organizers have overrated the value of the individual big clubs relative to the collective that gives them the publicity (domestic leagues, international club/national football). I also think that the clubs left behind are well positioned to recover from this exodus, and thrive (as opposed to the notion that they will wither and die). And when they do, the football they will provide will be superior as a spectacle and product.
You could argue that this would be the "real" European Cup if it has 90% of the top teams in Europe playing in it.
Yeah but they are creating a competition and labelling it as the top competition in Europe and placing themselves in the bloody thing. Not only does it have no history, it has no soul, no merit, nothing.
That's true enough, people have short memories and shorter attention spans.
What was I saying?
Oh yeah, but you also have a choice not to pay for this "product".
It's very easy to stop doing something, like activism, but it's also easy to not do something, like paying hard earned money for a terrible idea.
I missed that, I somehow didn't read the previous post.
Until half the league have no chance in winning the bloody thing.
Like the Jules Rimet trophy in 1930.
That is why marketing folks are paid silly money. Generate interest, create peer pressure and get into the consumer minds to make them pay for something which they originally did not want to pay for.
Its nothing like that the first World Cup
. This is solely to make rich clubs richer, it has nothing to do with sport.Reading this thread you get the impression it'll be a walk in the park to conquer the Asian and American market. Especially the American market is already hugely saturated with the MLB, NFL and various other sports leagues. And keep in mind they have to do it while essentially fighting out a war with the UEFA and all domestic leagues. All the while there are huge question marks behind the product they created. They don't even know if the league will have the attraction they're expecting it has due to a number of dynamics - over-saturation, diminishing returns, tribalism in European football, and so forth. Nobody knows how fans will react to this. Currently, 70% of fans are neglecting it in surveys.
And no matter what they do, they won't just have immediate full impact in Asia and America. Even if Europe plays a lesser role in the long run, they need it in the short term. And currently 70% of fans are opposed to their product according to surveys. This isn't something trivial, those are serious obstacles in their route to success.
We are talking about how winning a trophy is perceived not what the owners goals are otherwise you may as well not care about the PL, the CL and every other top level competitions. Players and casual fans aren't thinking about the organizers love of the game.Its nothing like that the first World Cup
This new league is NOTHING like the PL or the CL though, from what I have seen there are plenty of managers and players who do care.
It will never be on par with the champions league while it’s a closed group.
to even have a competition that hasn’t got the best teams from the majority of Europe’s leagues and no way for them to challenge for it, and then no doubt declare The winner the best in Europe is laughable.
Hopefully the quality of the teams that are not in this SL doesn’t not drop too quickly, I will always prefer competitive football leagues where you have to challenge just to stay in them and be rewarded by doing well in them
Interest statement from the villa chief exec including this big
“What we need to find is a way to enable these two tournaments to thrive and they won’t be better off without those clubs," said Purslow.
Seems they other CEs know this is happening and there’s no stopping it.
“What we need to find is a way to enable these two tournaments to thrive and they won’t be better off without those clubs," said Purslow.
Seems they other CEs know this is happening and there’s no stopping it.
Are you doing it on purpose? Every competitions have been criticized at their creation, the PL and CL included, it's nothing new and neutrals don't care, plenty of people will watch it and players will play in it if it exists. You seem to think that your opinion is universal, it's not.
I don't think its universal, where did I say that? Some people will love this idea, I don't, I thought the purpose of a forum was to air opinions?
The point I made wasn't whether you like the idea or not. You said that the trophy had no history, that's not a good argument because nothing has history the first time. It's totally understandble if you don't like the idea based on the nature of the competition but no history has never been a good argument for anything.
No history? I’ve heard Perez say Madrid’s already won the competition 13 times, going for 14 this year and it will be 15 next year
Yes, I am relatively optimistic that the European market will turn its back on this project. But I think it's quite clear that they are targeting a very young demographic, the ones who might become paying customers for the next few decades. Shorter games, maybe a penalty shoot-out after every draw, maybe a full season being played in Asia and/or America - who knows. I'm pretty sure they have a business plan which only to a very limited degree includes their current, domestic fanbase.
The more I think of it, the less likely I think it is that they will succeed. According to surveys, 70% reject the idea of the ESL. Now you can argue that they'll watch it anyway but people will have to pay for it but that's not European football culture. Most of the football fans I know (Cologne, Dortmund, Bayern, Leverkusen, Gladbach fans) don't give two fecks about the EPL or La Liga although the best players are playing there. If they are given the choice to watch Bayern vs. Salzburg or Barca vs. Chelsea, they'll go with Bayern vs. Salzburg. That's what's shown in our pubs. Football is a niche market, a very large proportion of fans are primarily interested in their own club and mildy interested in elite football. There's no way the majority of the European fan scene will abandon their own league and their own club in favor of an ESL subscription. And on top of that, they face huge hostility of fans and are in an open war with UEFA. On top of that, it's not unlikely that at the start of their league, Messi, Ronaldo, Neymar, Mbappe, Haaland and Sancho will still play for UEFA clubs. Now you can argue that they don't target the European market and want to get less dependent on it but they can't do that over night. It'll take years to truly displace the culturally biggest sports in those markets if it's possible at all. They need Europe until then, like it or not.
And their product isn't even indisputable. It might very well be the case that it's just an overkill or spineless because there's nothing at stake for the clubs.
Moreover, how do they plan to even get their league to 20 teams? Which club would join them in this situation without a long term guarantee? Imagine a team like Ajax getting an non-permanent invitation to the ESL. Sure, why wouldn't they risk getting expelled from their own league to join an unproven product that's rejected even by governments for one year without any securities?
this would just be an incremental change.
would anyone last week have said “football is for the people, and by the people” - not a chance. That boat sailed 30 years ago.
whatever the rights and wrongs, which are discussed in other threads. If this goes ahead, then yes I think it would be a success.
So, price-sensitive customers with limited spending power for at least the next 5-10 years?
There's no way they can pull this off without their domestic fan base. They'd be running out of money before they can even start convincing American sports fans that soccer isn't a game for girls.