UEFA Superleague idea

Discussion in 'UEFA and Europe' started by barroldinho, Aug 3, 2009.

  1. barroldinho

    barroldinho Member+

    Man Utd and LA Galaxy
    England
    Aug 13, 2007
    US/UK dual citizen in HB, CA
    Club:
    Manchester United FC
    Nat'l Team:
    England
    Not enamoured with the idea of a Superleague, but as it's come up often and looks like a possibility, I came up with the following system (sorry to cross-post, but I put this in another thread and it seemed to get lost there):

    The competition will be sixteen clubs and in the first the participants would be the top sixteen ranked coefficient clubs. The league would replace the CL for those teams, though the CL would still run as usual for everyone else. More about that later. Teams would also participate in their domestic league.

    The format would be as follows:

    2 groups of 8 (seeded), playing each other twice (14 games - same as current CL).

    The top 3 of each group enter playoffs at the end of the season. The playoffs would be conducted at a neutral "host" nation and the format would be:

    First round:
    Group winners get a bye to Semis.

    Second placed team form Group A plays Third from B and vice-versa.


    Semi Final:

    Group winner from Group A plays winner of "Group B 2nd vs Group A 3rd".
    Group winner from Group B plays winner of "Group A 2nd vs Group B 3rd".

    Final is self explanatory.


    Now onto the juicy stuff - Relegation and Promotion!

    To keep the league competitive, there would also be a pro/rel with a playoff which would work as follows:

    Bottom team from each group is automatically relegated and replaced the following season with the UCL finalists.

    Positions six and seven from each group would playoff in a system that would also contain the three highest coefficient clubs currently outside the SL and not already qualified via the UCL. The final playoff place would go to the the fourth placed coefficient team or Europa League winner if they are not already a coefficient top 4 team. If the latter is the case, they become the lowest ranked team.

    The following playoff matches would then take place:

    First Games:

    Lower Tier (the loser of these games are eliminated from the playoffs and will not be in the SL next season, winner goes to second game):

    Playoff 1 - Better 7th Place vs Coeff 4th (or EL Winner)
    Playoff 2 - Worse 7th Place vs Coeff 3rd

    Upper Tier (the winner plays in SL next season, loser goes to second game)

    Playoff 3 - Better 6th Place vs Coeff 2nd
    Playoff 4 - Worse 6th Place vs Coeff 1st

    Second Games (winner plays in SL next season, loser does not):

    Playoff 1 Winner vs Playoff 3 Loser
    Playoff 2 Winner vs Playoff 4 Loser

    This relegation system basically means that the two better placed league teams and higher Coeffs effectively have two opportunities to win/retain their spot in next years SL. The worse two league and Coeff teams effectively have to win two games in a row to retain/keep their spots.

    The Champions League:

    The likely drop in sponsorship interest would be partially subsidised by the likely revenue made by UEFA from the Superleague, allowing the competition to remain a lucrative one. Qualification would remain the same, with the spots vacated by SL participants filtering down to the other teams in the league. Coefficients based on national performance in this and the Europa League would continue to determine # of entrants from each league. A team "relegated" from the SL would have to qualify for one of these comps as usual and meet the above criteria to gain entry back into the contest. I'm not sure best how to deal with these teams Coefficients ranking as freezing it while there in the SL might just result in them qualifying for SL promotional playoffs the following year. Maybe it should also be a requirement that entry to the promotional playoffs that year requires a certain position in the domestic league?


    Domestic provisions - A team that qualifies for the SL playoffs could be playing 17 games in Europe a year. With this in mind, it might be worth easing "congestion" by either lowering the domestic leagues to no more than 18 teams, or having them enter the domestic cup two rounds later. Or maybe the SL could simply start around the time of qualifying for UCL and EL.

    -----------------------------------------------------------------------

    I think the above method would make for a competitive competition, with little chance of teams fielding weakend line-ups due to them all likely having something to play for throughout.

    The "elite" would get their opportunity for continuous games against each other, while the domestic league should take little-to-no impact due to the schedule being similar to that of the CL.

    The CL and UEFA Cup remain prestigious as not only are they a significant trophy, they grant access to the SL. The removal of the big dogs could also serve to make the CL a more diverse competition and may even give a few of the smaller teams some space to grow.

    Thoughts? Any glaring holes I missed? Idea just sucks in general?
     
  2. 96Squig

    96Squig Member

    Feb 4, 2004
    Hanover
    Club:
    Hannover 96
    Nat'l Team:
    Netherlands
    Like the idea. Not gonna happen though, as clubs like Real and the American-owned English clubs want 'security' and wouldn't like the idea of relegation at all, which is the most interesting aspect of your idea.
     
  3. barroldinho

    barroldinho Member+

    Man Utd and LA Galaxy
    England
    Aug 13, 2007
    US/UK dual citizen in HB, CA
    Club:
    Manchester United FC
    Nat'l Team:
    England
    I can't say I disagree. I think this could be a decent compromise though. It gives the top teams more security then currently.

    I did a rough seeding and the first season (if it happened now) would look like this:

    Group A

    Chelsea
    Liverpool
    Milan
    Sevilla
    Werder Bremen
    Villareal
    Roma
    PSV

    Group B

    Barca
    Man U
    Arsenal
    Bayern Munich
    Lyon
    Inter Milan
    R. Madrid
    Shakhtar Donetsk

    Based on where these teams finished in the UCL last season (and making wild assumptions about how non-qualifiers, Milan & co would have placed) the following teams would have been in the relegation situation...

    Group A:

    Auto Rel: PSV
    7th: Sevilla*
    6th: Werder Breman

    Group B:

    Auto Rel: Shakhtar
    7th: Real Madrid
    6th: Lyon

    Pro Playoffs:

    1) CSKA
    2) Zenit
    3) Porto
    4) Sporting

    So the playoffs would be:

    Lower Tier: 1) Madrid vs Sporting------2) Sevilla vs Porto
    Upper Tier: 1) Lyon vs Zenit-----------2) Werder Bremen vs CSKA

    So Madrid would have to beat Sporting and CSKA, which you would fancy them to do.

    Possibly to make the top spot in the group yet more appealing and to give these big babies further protection, maybe you could give them "immunity" the following season. That concerns me though, because you could theoretically have a tanking Real Madrid fielding kids all season because they can't go down.
     
  4. BocaFan

    BocaFan Member+

    Aug 18, 2003
    Queens, NY
    Some good ideas, but some issues that would need sorting:
    - why no two-legged knockouts in the Superleague playoffs? I don't see the benefit of this other that saving a measely 2 games. Plus you might have trouble selling-out the stadium if its a neutral site. Europe isn't like the USA. Nobody cares if big clubs from England and Spain are coming to their town.
    - too much dependence on UEFA club coefficients. It's okay to use them for seeding but not for such important things as qualification. Why not just relegate the loser of the 4-team playoff involving the #6 and #7 teams from each group directly and promote the 3rd-place finisher in the Champions League?
    - although its not clear, it sounds like the # of teams that qualify for the CL from each domestic league is made-up on the fly rather than determined before the season begins.
    - there's a danger that the Champions League final would become a non-event since qualification to the SL has already been achieved by winning the semifinal.
     
  5. barroldinho

    barroldinho Member+

    Man Utd and LA Galaxy
    England
    Aug 13, 2007
    US/UK dual citizen in HB, CA
    Club:
    Manchester United FC
    Nat'l Team:
    England
     
  6. BocaFan

    BocaFan Member+

    Aug 18, 2003
    Queens, NY

    Well, I was thinking something like:
    6A v 7B & 7A v 6B
    losers meet in Game "R"
    loser of Game "R" is relegated and replaced by 3rd-place finisher in of the Champions League.

    Or if that's too tedious, simply 7A v 7B with the loser over two-legs getting relegated.
     
  7. goliath74

    goliath74 Member

    May 24, 2006
    Hollywood, FL, United States
    Club:
    FC Dynamo Kyiv
    Nat'l Team:
    Ukraine
    Absolute garbage of an idea. No need to reinforce the current tiered situation in Europe. It also destroys the principle of the best team winning the title.

    What if the best team in 2009 (for the sake of conversation) is not one of the top 16? Now it can not possibly win the title as it is not even completing for it!

    This will also kill the CL and force the national leagues to change themselves to fit this bastard competition. And, oh, I am not going to see a minute of it.
     
  8. barroldinho

    barroldinho Member+

    Man Utd and LA Galaxy
    England
    Aug 13, 2007
    US/UK dual citizen in HB, CA
    Club:
    Manchester United FC
    Nat'l Team:
    England
    The 6A/7B works,
     
  9. Cirdan

    Cirdan Member

    Sep 12, 2007
    Jena (Germany)
    @goliath: the problem is that it is currently extremely unrealistic that the best team in 2009 is not among the best 16 of the last 5 seasons in the coefficiants (the only remotely possible exception is Juve, and that's only down to them getting punished for calciopoly, otherwise they would be in top 16 without a doubt). That is really one of the biggest problems in European football I think.

    @relegation: Instead of replacing the coefficiant teams in the relegation with noone, I'd replace them with the EL finalists. I know, the EL would be a third tier competition and not of a very high quality, but because of that, it would also be even less uninteresting and -profitable than it already is now, the hering of a possible SL qualification might be enough to keep the competition alive (though looking at the secondary domestic cups like the Carling Cup, I'm not too sure)

    Unfortunately, this suggestion would only reinforce the problem of the big teams getting stronger and the not-so-big can't keep up, it sucks for the domestic leagues. But it might be a working intermediate system on the way to a true Superleague seperate from the domestic leagues (which I think is a sad development, but probably unavoidable if we want to have competetive leagues and at least some unpredictability).
     
  10. barroldinho

    barroldinho Member+

    Man Utd and LA Galaxy
    England
    Aug 13, 2007
    US/UK dual citizen in HB, CA
    Club:
    Manchester United FC
    Nat'l Team:
    England
    I personally don't actually want a Superleague. Unfortunately though, the "elite" seem to have UEFA over a barrel. Their perception seems to be that they make the Champions League attractive by participating, so UEFA should strive to make them happy.

    When Perez raised this sorry subject, I got to thinking about it. For once, I decided to not just view it from my own stance of "no Superleague, no way, never!" but to hit it from as many angles.

    I see one area of merit to the thing: it does actually pit the top teams against each other on a more consistent basis. However,one thing that UEFA cannot allow to happen is to have our domestic leagues catastrophically damaged by having its major teams removed. I know some will say "good riddance", but you have to realise that an exclusive, non-relegation Superleague, regardless of how vacuous and uncompetitive it would be, would have the teams and money to draw all the top talent.

    Domestic leagues would become little more than feeder territories and the resultant dearth of outside sponsorship and funding (as opposed to the megabucks a glamour league could attract) would perpetuate the rich getting even richer.

    If UEFA employed my suggestion, these teams would STFU, at least for a decade or two and would still be playing in their own league. In the meantime, if (as suggested) UEFA used some of the revenue from such a competition to subsidise the UCL prize money as closely as possible, suddenly the Tottenhams and Villareals of this world could see a financial upturn. It would also maintain some prestige for the CL (and the EL if it was used as another promotional avenue).

    It could also serve as an argument against the likes of the former G14 because we now have a full, established mechanism for determining on-field who is and isn't "elite". If Real Madrid are soundly beaten in an 8-team league containing the very best, UEFA have some leverage: they had the opportunity to play the best teams in Europe throughout the year and they weren't good enough.

    Regardless of history, who would want a breakaway league with that team? Especially if you're sitting pretty in the one that already exists.
     
  11. Cirdan

    Cirdan Member

    Sep 12, 2007
    Jena (Germany)
    I don't really want a Super League either.

    But I want the leagues to be competetive. I'm quite horrified of the situation in England... what is really the fun in the whole thing if it's clear from the beginning that the rest of the league has no chance at all to compete with the top 4? In Germany we have Bayern winning more than half of the titles in the last decade. And I fear it will only get worse.

    I think what's really needed to counter that is to stop the notion of financially rewarding success, at least to an extend. The titleholder of the league must not get more money than the bottom teams, otherwise the good will continue get better and the bad will get worse. Unfortunately, I fail to see how that's possible with the top teams getting access to additional European competitions (the CL in particular) and getting loads of additional money, unless you could somehow get the clubs to agree to redistribute most of the CL revenue to the domestic leagues and the clubs not actually playing CL - which is completely unrealistic.

    So, with the financial advantage the big clubs already have, I more and more think that completely cutting them out of their inferior domestic competition and putting them into a seperate European Superleague, with even distribution of revenue (or maybe even favouring the unsuccessfull) in the Superleague itself and the domestic leagues might be the only chance of stopping the process of European football getting more predictable by the year.

    Again, I prefer to have Bayern in the Bundesliga instead of a seperate European Superleague, and I like the European competitions as they are, but only if I can't be 95%+ sure that Bayern wins the Bundesliga anyway and if I can't accurately predict the first and second place in every CL group before the season even started, and I fear we are getting very close to that point.
     
  12. goliath74

    goliath74 Member

    May 24, 2006
    Hollywood, FL, United States
    Club:
    FC Dynamo Kyiv
    Nat'l Team:
    Ukraine
    In 1987 and 1991 we had relative nobodies win the Champions Cup. And just a few years back, Porto who were prior to that no better than 10th or 12th won the CL. Obviously, it is possible.

    Besides, I hate this "top 16 UEFA coefficients" thing. Who's to say that one of these teams is better than everyone below them?

    For example, is Shakhtar who may have a top 16 UEFA Coefficients points better than Dynamo Kyiv?

    Hell, a top 16 team might not even qualify for CL and we want to drag it into the SL?

    At the end of the day, why do we want to create yet another redundant competition just to yield to real madrid's big cheese whining?
     
  13. Cirdan

    Cirdan Member

    Sep 12, 2007
    Jena (Germany)
    '87 and '91 is ages ago. It was not even the CL back then.

    Porto in 2004 was the last true "surprise" winner - arguably, Liverpool a year later was also a bit of a surprise, they were "merely" 10th in the coef ranking. In the 6 seasons since Porto, no team reached the CL final that was not in the coefficiant top 10. And in the last 3 years, even every semi finalist was seeded in pot 1 in the group stage. Nowadays, it seems like Bayern or Arsenal winning would be at least as big a surprise as Porto was 5 years ago. But maybe I'll be proven wrong. I certainly hope so.
     
  14. BocaFan

    BocaFan Member+

    Aug 18, 2003
    Queens, NY
    Yeah really. How much longer are people going to bring-up Porto 2004? We've only had 8 different semifinalists in the last 5 years.

    The same "problem" exists now. Theoretically the best team in Europe might not participate in the Champions League since the CL teams are determined based on the previous season's performance.

    "Theoretically" being the key word in that sentence.
     
  15. goliath74

    goliath74 Member

    May 24, 2006
    Hollywood, FL, United States
    Club:
    FC Dynamo Kyiv
    Nat'l Team:
    Ukraine
    This problem is much less of a problem now, as this hypothetical 17th best team is more likely to be competing in CL already, since there are nearly 100 clubs taking part in CL from the earliest rounds on. The SL in this case is a much more exclusive company and if there were such hypothetical 17th ranked team, they would have no way of proving they're the best on the continent.
     
  16. BocaFan

    BocaFan Member+

    Aug 18, 2003
    Queens, NY
    Yeah, but no more than 4 from the top leagues which is close to or equal what the SuperLeague would have. I don't think Liverpool finishing 5th in the EPL only to rebound the following season is any less likely than them getting relegated from this proposed 16-team SL and rebounding.
     
  17. barroldinho

    barroldinho Member+

    Man Utd and LA Galaxy
    England
    Aug 13, 2007
    US/UK dual citizen in HB, CA
    Club:
    Manchester United FC
    Nat'l Team:
    England
    The SL always would be a more exclusive contest. That's the whole point. We already have a viable "all inclusive" option. The aim of an SL competition is to have all the top teams playing each other. There is also the aim of ensuring the participation of the 'elite'. As odious as this latter concept is, I think my idea facilitates both without giving the current perceived 'biggest teams' an eternal berth. In this format they would still at least have to prove themselves to remain.

    I used the coefficient rankings as it seemed the fairest way of working out the sixteen strongest teams in Europe right now. Maybe stipulating that all entrants had to have participated in the UCL in each of the last 5 seasons would ensure a stronger pool?

    To answer your question about the 17th being the best in Europe: given that the 16 top-performing teams had already been taken out of the CL, you'd expect this other team to reach a position of qualification for the SL straight away.

    Your question is a bit like asking "what if the 21st team in England somehow had a good enough squad to win the Premiership". You'd expect promotion one year, followed by a strong title challenge the next.

    Again, I'm not saying I want this, just making a suggestion if it had to happen. How would you select participants?
     
  18. goliath74

    goliath74 Member

    May 24, 2006
    Hollywood, FL, United States
    Club:
    FC Dynamo Kyiv
    Nat'l Team:
    Ukraine
    The participants are already selected by UEFA, no need to go any further

    My suggestion for SL - forget it, delete it from our memories, punish everyone mentioning it.


    And if 17th team wins "promotion to SL", it would already be too late for this season. And where would Porto's title be if they had to wait another season?
     
  19. BocaFan

    BocaFan Member+

    Aug 18, 2003
    Queens, NY
    Porto probably wouldn't be capable of winning this competition today anyway. Even the 2004 team would've found it much more difficult to win because they probably would've had to beat Arsenal. You can't just hope for an easy draw and 2 -3 months of good form to be Champions of Europe in the league format that barroldinho is proposing here.
     
  20. barroldinho

    barroldinho Member+

    Man Utd and LA Galaxy
    England
    Aug 13, 2007
    US/UK dual citizen in HB, CA
    Club:
    Manchester United FC
    Nat'l Team:
    England
    I would argue that under this system, after gaining promotion Porto would be one of only 16 teams Europe-wide that is in this contest. That means, one of only 16 teams that gets to play against the world's biggest clubs as well as getting to do so on a regular basis. This would make FC Porto one of the most attractive clubs to play for, at least in a footballing sense and that would actually give them more leverage in terms of signing and retaining talent. Indeed, had Mourinho won the CL in this format, to be promoted to the SL the following season, it's at least arguable that he could have seen that as a major challenge and stayed on longer.
     
  21. goliath74

    goliath74 Member

    May 24, 2006
    Hollywood, FL, United States
    Club:
    FC Dynamo Kyiv
    Nat'l Team:
    Ukraine
    But the question "WHY" still remains. Why do we need to make CL a two-tiered league. Most fans (me included) would not watch it, simply because my team's not in the competition. FC Porto will find that their finances will actually dry up after a couple of years as no one watches this thing.
     
  22. barroldinho

    barroldinho Member+

    Man Utd and LA Galaxy
    England
    Aug 13, 2007
    US/UK dual citizen in HB, CA
    Club:
    Manchester United FC
    Nat'l Team:
    England
    As I've said several times in this thread, a super league is not something I particularly want. However, it is something that is wanted in certain quarters and keeps being brought up. Perez mentioned it again this summer and it has been tabled at UEFA meetings.

    This whole thread is a hypothetical. It's based on the concept that a super league is happening whether we like it or not. This is how I would set it up if it had to happen.

    The answers to your "why" vary by which party is talking about it.

    The case Perez put forth is that the premier European club competition should see it's top teams competing on a regular basis. He feels that this doesn't happen in the Champions League.

    Some parties feel that the quality and history of their team attracts people to watch competitions like the CL and on that basis have pushed for a bigger slice of the pie (and recieved it). On the same basis, teams have pushed for greater chance of participation in the CL (hence 4 teams from the top leagues). Some of these teams see permanent (or longterm) inclusion in a continental championship is a logical progression.

    There is also the fact that right now there are many teams throughout Europe in leagues that they routinely dominate. There is a general theory that removing the dominant teams from the bigger leagues would open up the championships, while the big teams would be regularly pitted against a more challenging level of opposition. My idea doesn't really deal with that, though you could argue that it would open things up at continental level, with countless teams now capable of pushing for the CL, while a pool of very strong teams contested the SL.

    Following your own logic, you'd still be watching the CL because it featured your team, so there's even an argument that the competition (and UEFA generally) would attract plenty of revenue which might even move such teams closer to parity with the elite.
     
  23. goliath74

    goliath74 Member

    May 24, 2006
    Hollywood, FL, United States
    Club:
    FC Dynamo Kyiv
    Nat'l Team:
    Ukraine

    Yes, but not the SL! Which means that SL will not get my viewership by default.

    Secondly, many here deride the UEFA Cup/EL as a second rate competition. Well, guess what, SL creation would relegate CL to a second rate competition. So winning CL would mean exactly what? Oh, we are CL champions! Which means we are a proud 17th best club! Whoopee!
     
  24. BocaFan

    BocaFan Member+

    Aug 18, 2003
    Queens, NY
    ...17th best and promotion to the SL.
    There's nothing wrong with a second- or third-tier competition. It exists in every domestic league system and people love it. That idea works. As long as there's the ability to move-up the pyramid.

    BTW, you are contradicting yourself in this thread compared to the other thread where you say winning the UEFA Cup was really meaningful ("no hollow feeling")
    https://www.bigsoccer.com/forum/showpost.php?p=18522128&postcount=17
     
  25. goliath74

    goliath74 Member

    May 24, 2006
    Hollywood, FL, United States
    Club:
    FC Dynamo Kyiv
    Nat'l Team:
    Ukraine
    Not true. If Real Valiadolid wins La Liga, they're still playing in CL and real Madrid are in SL no matter where they end up in La Liga, as long as they don't bomb out of the SL. This is not a competition that should follow normal promotion/relegation.

    No hollow feeling at all. UEFA Cup is the second highest competition. And Ukrainian clubs had never won this one (we had won CWC twice and a SuperCup, but never a UC/EL)

    CL is the top competition and every club entering it has hopes (however illusory) to be considered the top club side in Europe. In SL's case it is limited to just the 16 teams.

    Should the SL be created, a CL champion is but a 17th best club. Whether or not they get promoted is irrelevant
     

Share This Page