European Superleague: what do you think

Discussion in 'UEFA and Europe' started by Goforthekill, Nov 12, 2012.

  1. RichardL

    RichardL BigSoccer Supporter

    May 2, 2001
    Berkshire
    Club:
    Reading FC
    Nat'l Team:
    England
    I would ban owners making loans to clubs

    If they want to embark on a spending spree with their own money, then so be it, but they shouldn't be allowed to turn round in four years time and say they want their money back. Money should have to be treated as sponsorship, immediately becoming the property of the club, not a loan they have to repay.
     
    barroldinho repped this.
  2. COYS

    COYS Member

    Jul 29, 2008
    London
    Club:
    Tottenham Hotspur FC
    Nat'l Team:
    England
    It wouldn't happen. I'm sure it wouldn't.

    It's the Champions League, the growth of the Premier League and overseas fans (99% of them who support <1% of clubs) who have helped to create this elite cartel of superclubs.

    If there were a European Super League then domestic leagues wouldn't be as popular. The masses who follow the Premier League would turn their attention towards a Super League because they'd be more inclined to want to watch that sort of football.

    I think this would be best for everybody really.

    You have to admit, surely, that what we've got currently, isn't healthy for football?
     
  3. Whispered11

    Whispered11 Member+

    U.C. Sampdoria
    Japan
    Oct 4, 2011
    Munich, Germany
    Club:
    UC Sampdoria
    Nat'l Team:
    Japan
    Superleague? Just ****. Give more money to Europe League and nobody will ever mentioned that kind of crap. What about banning for real the clubs which don't respect the Financial Fair-Play?
     
  4. COYS

    COYS Member

    Jul 29, 2008
    London
    Club:
    Tottenham Hotspur FC
    Nat'l Team:
    England
    How can they give more money to the clubs in the Europa League?

    What money? And where will this money come from?
     
  5. NuffSaid

    NuffSaid BigSoccer Yellow Card

    Jun 14, 2012
    Club:
    Chelsea FC
    I don't think the masses would turn their attention to a European Superleague at all! Not unless it involved a majority of domestic clubs - do you honestly see the Geordies turning their back on Newcastle United if they were not one of the few English clubs involved?
     
  6. Antario2

    Antario2 Member

    Jan 29, 2012
    Club:
    AFC Ajax
    Part of the ( TV) revenue from the Champions League could be transferred to the Europa League to make it worthwhile for clubs to compete. It would also damped the competitive edge champions league access gives to clubs over the other competitors in national leagues.
     
  7. RichardL

    RichardL BigSoccer Supporter

    May 2, 2001
    Berkshire
    Club:
    Reading FC
    Nat'l Team:
    England
    I don't think fans would turn their back on the teams they currently support any more than lower division fans abandoned their clubs as the premier league took off.

    What you might see though is younger fans being drawn to the "real" clubs in the super league, rather than their local ones, and support diminishing that way.

    The league that's left would also be a much harder sell. If five English clubs are playing in this superleague, for example, what have the winners of the remaining top division actually won? How can they be champions of England when everyone knows that are five better English clubs?

    The game might even need to restructure, perhaps going regional, to get some relevance back.
     
  8. COYS

    COYS Member

    Jul 29, 2008
    London
    Club:
    Tottenham Hotspur FC
    Nat'l Team:
    England
    I see what you mean, but when you think about it, it's no more absurd than clubs owned by Russians, Americans and Saudis, with foreign managers, mostly foreign players, and more fans overseas than in this country being called 'English champions'.
     
  9. RichardL

    RichardL BigSoccer Supporter

    May 2, 2001
    Berkshire
    Club:
    Reading FC
    Nat'l Team:
    England
    That doesn't really follow. The English champions are the best club in England, not the best group of English players.

    When Liverpool clinched the title in 1986 with a team that didn't contain a single English player, nobody question whether they could really call themselves English champions.
     
  10. NuffSaid

    NuffSaid BigSoccer Yellow Card

    Jun 14, 2012
    Club:
    Chelsea FC
    But you can still be sure they are the 'best' club in the country and therefore you cannot argue that they are the 'English Leaugue' Champions, the best club side will always win the league, this cannot be said of any football containing any type of 'cup format' because players / teams can have an off day or an unlucky afternoon. Manchester United were the best team in England last season without any doubts.
     
  11. NuffSaid

    NuffSaid BigSoccer Yellow Card

    Jun 14, 2012
    Club:
    Chelsea FC
    I can understand what you are saying Richard but would the clubs that are in this Euro league get any more 'fanboy' support than the top clubs are getting already? Most people in England still do not support Manchester United, Chelsea, Arsenal or Liverpool despite them being the most dominant teams over the last 30 or so years.
     
  12. TerminusFooty

    TerminusFooty Member+

    Feb 4, 2012
    Club:
    Atlanta Silverbacks
    Nat'l Team:
    United States
    That's why you need pro/rel in and out of the Euro "super league". Then the domestic leagues stay relevant because your team could eventually, maybe some day, make it into the Euro league.
     
  13. RichardL

    RichardL BigSoccer Supporter

    May 2, 2001
    Berkshire
    Club:
    Reading FC
    Nat'l Team:
    England
    the risk is that by creating an autonomous european league you create a separation of the game that you don't get between the premier league and the other divisions, and certainly not between "the elite" and the other premier league clubs.

    The difference in status of Arsenal and Chelsea (if in) to Spurs and West Ham (if out) could grow hugely, and they could quickly find themselves struggling to maintain even local support in the way that the likes of Crystal Palace and Charlton do.

    To a large extent it would depend a lot of how the media react to it. If they start to portray it as the league, then what's left of the top division could be diminished in the way that football outside the premier league is currently.
     
  14. NuffSaid

    NuffSaid BigSoccer Yellow Card

    Jun 14, 2012
    Club:
    Chelsea FC
    Personally in that case I would prefer my team in the national league! A Chelsea Spurs match could never be bettered by Chelsea v Porto for example,
     
  15. 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
    Would it though?

    Wealth is relative. The likes of Spurs and Newcastle would immediately become the richest and most attended teams in the country. Their longevity in the top flight also stands a good chance of them retaining more "hardcore fans" (especially Newcastle).

    Meanwhile, the clubs that don't have as great a fanbase will likely see a more significant drop. Just take a look at the Championship vs Premier League attendance. The historically great clubs like Wolves and Forest can maintain a 3/4 full stadium. The only ones exceeding that are those who are overachieving based on previous history, such as Brighton and Cardiff. Yet they hit the Premier league and regardless of ticket prices, competitiveness etc, most start getting close to full houses.

    I don't think the status quo is a good thing but this concept of just letting those other clubs do there own thing actually just creates a more extreme version of what you're saying is wrong with the game.

    Think about it: under the status quo, with FFP in full effect, the chances of Spurs winning the top honours are admittedly slim. Under your proposal, the chances of Spurs winning the top honours are zero. Not to mention the fact, you'd likely never again see a Gareth Bale, Aaron Lennon, Dimitar Berbatov, Paul Gascoigne, Gary Lineker, Jurgen Klinsmann or Teddy Sheringham play for your club in their prime ever again.

    Is it worth it, just for the superficial fact that you can now win a "league title"? In fact, isn't it just as prestigious and of more benefit to the clubs wellbeing to finish fifth in the existing Premier League than to be Champions of the competition you suggest?
     
  16. TerminusFooty

    TerminusFooty Member+

    Feb 4, 2012
    Club:
    Atlanta Silverbacks
    Nat'l Team:
    United States
    If you had a full regular season in a Euro Superleague, similar rivalries would develop over time.
     
  17. goliath74

    goliath74 Member

    May 24, 2006
    Hollywood, FL, United States
    Club:
    FC Dynamo Kyiv
    Nat'l Team:
    Ukraine
    Or not.

    Majority of rivalries are based on geography/locality or intense hate. I do not see what would make me hate Bayern Munchen or Real Madrid. They would, at worst, be ambivalent to me. That is if my Dynamo Kyiv were involved in the competition. if not, I would not watch a single superleague match.
     
  18. TerminusFooty

    TerminusFooty Member+

    Feb 4, 2012
    Club:
    Atlanta Silverbacks
    Nat'l Team:
    United States
    Sure, the geographic distances may be a little greater if it's a Euro league, but teams closer to each other would develop rivalries eventually over time, as would teams consistently battling for titles, etc. It's just human nature.
     
  19. NuffSaid

    NuffSaid BigSoccer Yellow Card

    Jun 14, 2012
    Club:
    Chelsea FC
    Maybe, maybe not, but I can honestly say that a Porto v Napoli match would not interest me the way an Aston Villa v Birmingham City match would - I just don't feel a connection to 'foreign' match ups the way I do to domestic ones, perhaps because I live on an island it is an island mentality? although I feel sure that a Potugese fan wouldn't have as much interest in Arsenal v Ajax as they would Porto v Benfica?
     
  20. TerminusFooty

    TerminusFooty Member+

    Feb 4, 2012
    Club:
    Atlanta Silverbacks
    Nat'l Team:
    United States
    Of course you don't...now. That's why I said "eventually over time". If you are playing these teams every Saturday, it would become a different situation. I live in the US, where Houston Dynamo is starting to develop a rivalry with Sporting Kansas City. These two teams are located as far away from each other as some European clubs in different countries - but they are in the same league and have fierce battles regularly, so it doesn't matter. These things are organic and malleable, not set in stone.

    (But I respect your opinion, and I agree that some fans may not take to it. And old rivalries would still stand. West Ham's rivalry with Millwall doesn't go away when they're in the Premiere league.)
     
  21. goliath74

    goliath74 Member

    May 24, 2006
    Hollywood, FL, United States
    Club:
    FC Dynamo Kyiv
    Nat'l Team:
    Ukraine
    And what about intense hate? As I have said that, assuming my Dynamo Kyiv were involved in the SuperLeague, how can I hate Bayern Munchen (or Liverpool, or Barca, etc.)? For what? We used to hate Spartak Moskva in the USSR League back in the day, for obvious reasons and nothing replaced that rivalry. 22 years later, Dynamo still do not have a rivalry like that.
     
  22. TerminusFooty

    TerminusFooty Member+

    Feb 4, 2012
    Club:
    Atlanta Silverbacks
    Nat'l Team:
    United States
    If another team gives yours enough trouble in league play, you can learn to hate them. But yeah, the geopolitical context is a bit beyond that. Still doesn't nullify the idea of a Euro league in my opinion.

    (Plus, you may end up playing Spartak in a Euro league!)
     
  23. NuffSaid

    NuffSaid BigSoccer Yellow Card

    Jun 14, 2012
    Club:
    Chelsea FC
    I can understand what you are saying but I think perhaps because Napoli (for example) are 'foreign' to me it makes all the difference, in the US you have different states but essentially one country, Europe of course is many different countries and cultures. Also the advantage that European countries have is the size (or lack of), if I go to Stamford Bridge I know that there will be a good sized away support to give the occasion some 'zip', fans will travel for the champions league because the European ties are 'relatively' rare but if every week your team had an 'away' game somewhere on the continent I dont think people could afford to travel and therefore 'away' support could be lacking somewhat. Arsenal v Zenit St. Petersberg on a wet evening in January is not going to attract much interest if it became a run of the mill 'league game'.
     
  24. goliath74

    goliath74 Member

    May 24, 2006
    Hollywood, FL, United States
    Club:
    FC Dynamo Kyiv
    Nat'l Team:
    Ukraine
    What nullifies your idea of the Euro league is the damage that would be done to the domestic leagues by removing the top talent and clubs from them. Losing the storied rivalries is just an additional negative bonus.
     
  25. NuffSaid

    NuffSaid BigSoccer Yellow Card

    Jun 14, 2012
    Club:
    Chelsea FC
    I dont think the domestic leagues would be the 'long term' losers to be honest, I think once the initial 'fanfare' of a European league dies down it would struggle to actually compete with countries 'domestic leagues' (in some countries anyway). I can tell you honestly how I feel as a supporter of a club that would perhaps 'qualify' for this Euro superleague, as a Chelsea supporter I love the fact that they have qualified for the Champions League next season but given the choice of Euro League OR EPL I would prefer it if they stayed in the EPL. I like the Champions League exactly as it is - I think there is also a place for the Europa league but I think the format needs to be changed a little.
     

Share This Page