It's a logical competition. Since competitions to find the best team in each national confederation exist (leagues), competitions to find the best team in each ontinental confederation exist (Champs Leagues), it follows logic that a competition to find the best team in the whole planet must also exist. As is, getting the the CWC is the most difficult part. Chelsea is likely to keep going to the Champs League, but it may be other 20 years before they have a shot at this Club World Cup. That alone makes the CWC more prestigious than any continental tournament. Also, as some fans on the Chelsea boards say, it's the one cup missing in the cabinet. It never hurts to add a cup you've never won before.
Based on the lineups they've put out, safe to say that Liverpool, Manchester United and probably Chelsea take the Club World Cup more seriously than they do the Carling Cup, or whatever it's branded now.
Guardiola really stressed this point to his players when Barcelona reached the 2009 Club World Cup final. He told them in the dressing room that they would become "eternal" if they won for the first time the only major title that the club had failed to achieve in 1992 and 2006. After Barca defeated Estudiantes in extra time, Pep was an emotional wreck.
No it doesn't. Barca never played in the Europa League and probably won't for a while. Doesn't make it more prestigious than the Champions League. It's certainly a nice trophy to have.
Terrible comparison, imo. The Champions League is the pinnacle of Europe. And you cannot play in the Club World Cup without winning the Champions League. Franz Beckenbauer once labeled the UEFA Cup as "The Loser's Cup". Big difference.
Well, not until the CWC is hosted by a European country at least. There is nothing in the definition of "prestige" that links it to rarity of being involved in something. If the tournament is so prestigious, why do coaches and players of the UEFA champion always come out in front of the media and try to convince people it is really important? Whenever people try that hard to sell you something you know its not that good.
This is completely random and unrelated but it's something I have to get off my chest: I hate it when someone refers to the "Club World Cup" as the "World Club Cup". It drives me crazy for some reason. That is all
They try to convince because in it's short history it's always been played a million miles away from them. How to drum up your supporters to go to Japan if you said it was important? Why would Inter Milan, Liverpool, Barcelona and all say to their fans, we go to UAE, Japan, but we don't need you because it's tosh, of course they drum up the importance, they want people their supporting them, they don't want to look like poor souls.
Why is the importance even questioned though if it was as prestigious as UEFA CL? Oh yeah, because its not. The only time I ever see the importance of games questioned is ahead of matches for Carling Cup, Charity Shield, UEFA Super-cup, Europa League and the like. If a tournament really was highly prestigious, no "selling" of its significance would be required. Liverpool didn't need to sell the importance of the CL to get fans to travel to Istanbul in 2005. A BMW sells itself. A Hyundai OTOH...
Europeans often say and believe the UEFA Champions League comprises of the best clubs in the world. For them there is nothing to gain by being on the same pitch with an Asian, African or North American club. They're only supposed to play those teams during pre-season tours and only if lots and lots of money is paid to them. And they know how serious the South Americans want to beat them. Losing to a Sao Paulo or Internacional places a major sting in their pride. They believe that continent's best players are already playing in Europe. Why do they need convincing? Because they're full of themselves is why.
That is what the original trophy was called. It went by "Intercontinental Cup" and/or "World Club Cup". I actually don't care for "Club World Cup" because whenever I see the acronym CWC I always think of the old Cup Winners Cup. When abbreviating it I tend to use FCWC to avoid any confusion.
You sure about that? I'd argue the World Cup's prestige would be diminished if it were played more often.
It's a possible explanation, but I don't buy it. CL is more prestigious because there are more good teams in it, it lasts all season and has a great history. Besides, if the UEFA champion is looking-down on the CWC competition, it can be said that the South American champion is doing the same to the AFC, CAF, OFC, etc. champions. Because they seem 100% focused on beating the UEFA champion.
CWC and CL are both played every year so its a moot point. The confederations cup is harder to qualify for than the World Cup. Which is more prestigious?
Which is true...at least in football, the "best of the rest" get a crack at a world title, unlike the big sports in the US.
Not for the teams involved: Chelsea will most likely get a crack at the Champions League every year for the near future, while as Suyuntuy pointed out, it may be some time before they return to the CWC. Apples and oranges - you can't qualify for the World Cup through the Confederations Cup.
Why does that matter? I'm just illustrating that just because its more rare/difficult to participate in something doesn't make it more prestigious.
Hold on, what are you getting at here? Liverpool didn't need to sell the importance of CL, that has never been questioned, but CWC they had to sell it because not many in the UK understand it. It is a presitigous tounament which UK just hasn't got yet,just like the earley International World Cups really
You can't compare the UEFA CL to the CWC, because the UCL is part of the CWC process. The CWC contains the same teams that the UCL contains. And ACL, CCL, etc. So saying the UCL has better teams, is wrong. The CWC has them too. It's like comparing the baseball reg season to the Word Series. "Well, the regular season has more teams, thus it is more prestigious. The WS only has 2 teams." The WS is the climax to the baseball season, and the CWC is the climax to the world's Champions Leagues.
Irrelevant, imo. Winning the Confederations Cup doesn't make you champions of anything. Winning the Club World Cup earns you the title of 'world champion'. I would also argue that when a national team wins their continental tournament the players don't think to themselves afterwards, "We get to go to the Confederations Cup". Probably only the OFC champion thinks that. Whereas in probably 5/6 of the club continental tournaments the winning players have it in their minds that they will be playing in the Club World Cup.
That's a stretch. The EPL, CL and CWC are viewed as separate competitions containing a different set of teams. And how things are viewed is the basis of prestige. So even if you're technically correct, its not really what matters.