Let's say that FIFA and UEFA crumble after Sepp Blatter admits to a love affair with Victoria Beckham and all sorts of other crap goes down. They're gone. All the leagues in Europe have turned to you to create a new system of play. But they want a EuroLeague. Much like what the G-14 were going to pull at the turn of the century, but this is bigger. How would you organize it? How would you determine who is in it? Any trade rules? What? Remember, you've started all over. Everything is whiped clean. What will you do?
I'd tell them to ************ off and worry more about the health of their domestic leagues. Then I'd have the Champions League reduced to 16 teams (after qualifiers), one round of group play, and then a home and home series from the Quarterfinals on.
Of course I'll answer my own question. Basically there is 2 years of qualifying. The first year will be completely local games. The top two leagues from each country (not to exceed 40 teams) will be merged and every club plays every other club (same 3pt win, 1 pt draw, 0 pts loss apply). At the end of the year, the top 50 teams on the continent (a different amount will be taken from each country depending on the quality of the country) are taken into the second year. The second year begins using the 50 teams. The teams are split into 5 Groups of 10 teams a group. Clubs play every club in the group. At the end of that phase, the top 2 teams from each group are then a part of the EuroLeague (BTW, I know that name SUCKS). The remaining teams are split into two groups of 20. Group play for each group. At the end of the games, the top 3 teams from each group are pushed into the EuroLeague. The 4th through 7th place from each of the groups are still in it for the last two spots. A play-off bracket goes like so G1: A4 v. B7 G2: B5 v. A6 G3: B4 v. A7 G4: A5 v. B6 G5: G1 v. G2 G6: G3 v. G4 G7: G5 v. G6 (Winner of this game earns a spot) G8: Loser of G5 v. Loser of G6 G9: G8 v. Loser of G7 (Winner of this game earns a spot) Walah, we have an 18 club group representing the best in Europe. (I think I made it way too complicated, but who cares.) The following year would open up the real play. We have our 18-club league. The other 22 clubs went back to the clubs for each of their leagues. They are immeditately qualified for this years UEFA Cup. UEFA Cup now determines who is promoted into the EuroLeague. The bottom 2 teams are relegated from EuroLeague. The Winner of the UEFA cup is promoted into EuroLeague and a play-off between the Runner Up of the UEFA Cup and the winner of the 3rd/4th Place game takes place to see who takes the other spot in the EuroLeague. All the other clubs are back into normal league form with Divisions, etc. Other cups will still take place and teams from EuroLeague can play in them (ie. FA Cup). Every year EuroLeague plays 34 games a season and it has massive ticket draws. Everyone is happy.
Barry Gividen keep your horrible Euroleague fantasies to yourself please. Don't want it, don't need it, won't happen. Period.
This is the worst idea ever if you had a major EuroLeague then nobody would go. The simple fact is that ticket prices would rockets andnobodyhas the money to trail over Europe every other week to follow their team, apart from the prawn sarnie brigade.
I will stick with the old teams. The league needs tradition, legacy and fan base. Then, I just have the top 28 richest clubs in all of Europe to play the EuroLeague D1. I want clubs who can complete with each other finanically. I want the clubs to be on par with each other. For example, Rangers might not be the top 28 teams in Europe. But if they play in a richer league, they will spend more money and build a much better team than they would in Scotland. Then, the second richest 28 teams will play in the D2 and so on.... For certain big European markets, I will form new teams if no big club exists over there. I will follow the example of PSG in the 70's. I might combine a few Belgian teams into 1 or 2 super teams to complete with the top Italian and Spanish clubs.
PSG didn't become big until CANAL+ pumped loads of money into them. Why is there an assumption that a Euro League that would totally exclude 99% of the european clubs, would be a good thing? For the vast majority of European clubs, including most of the G14 clubs, the domestic league is more important than the champions league. put it this way. domestic failure and a good champions league run - manager sacked. domestic success and a poor champions league run - manager praised. That's just the way it is. Just the same as how in Europe club football is far more important than the world cup is. It may not make sense, but the more personal something is, the more important it is. Put it this way, what would (typical) American sports fans want - an NFL full of American teams, or a world NFL with only two or three American teams?
Anyone who doesn't instantly understand why the Euroleague is monster that should be stopped at all cost should stick to nice US franchise sports and forget about football. You don't understand it.
id turn the clock back.... -bring back the Cup winners cup -return the Uefa cup to its former glory and allow no more entry from Champions league rejects.. -Only genuine league champions would play in the champions league ..No teams who finish 2nd,3rd or 4th in a league would be allowed entry... I think a limit of foreigners to 5 per team would be a good idea.. Each side would have at least 6 home players in their lineup.This would allow youngsters to come through the ranks instead of being blocked by an import.
Oooh...but I do like those ideas. .Forget the Euro league, keep the domestic leagues the way they are now. .4 or 5 foreign player limit .I think the level of play in the CL has improved since they let more teams from the better leagues play in that Cup, but sending 2 or 3 for the top leagues is enough. You have to keep some better quality teams for the UEFA Cup. .At least fuçking try-out the use of video replays to see if it's use can be a good thing for the sport or not, as opposed to saying from the start it shouldn't and won't happen. You can get a replay seconds after the play has happened; put a tv in front of the 4th man on the sidelines on which he can instantly see replays - who really doesn't do squat now, apart from telling the coaches of the teams "you can't cross that line you meanie" - let him be in contact with the ref through walkie talkies if need be to let him know what happened etc. etc. Now you can let the game continue any time there's the possibility of offside, but whistle when the 4th man has seen if it's actually offside or not seconds after the pass has been given. (the linesmen could still be around to wave their flags for fouls and obvious offside plays or whatever) Even if you whistle after a goal was scored because you needed time to see the replay, at least then you can say for an absolute fact that it was annulled because the player was offside.
Thanks to RichardL for explaining why he thinks EuroLeague sucks. Only constructive post posted. Everyone else: You don't have to like my idea. You can say it sucks. Chances are, in 5 months I'll agree with you. But instead of just saying, "You're idea sucks and you suck and you're a loser and I think you suck you big suck head!" (which is the equavilent of any post that responded to my post) how about you tell me why my idea sucks. To quote: Anyone who doesn't instantly understand why the Euroleague is monster that should be stopped at all cost should stick to nice US franchise sports and forget about football. You don't understand it. End quote. Whoa. I am so amazed by the, if you don't know I'm not going to tell you argument. I don't understand why this idea is so horrible. I do realize some of the side effects (increase in ticket prices, less games for certain clubs, etc.) but the appeal of the best 18 clubs in Europe playing each other is something I can't pass up. And yes, I do realize that chances are if a Super League were to be made, that a lot of Football leagues would loose support. Please, explain more as to why it sucks. I am obviously missing something.
Well, this issue has been debated over and over and people are just tired of it now. To put it short: A Euroleague would hurt the domestic championships, may be even kill them. The domestic club championships are carrying this sport on their shoulders. Much more than the World Cup, much more than the Champions League and all other tournaments. To devalue the "bread and butter" of football for 18 big-name clubs to kick around between themselves is a huge gamble not worth taking. In America it might work for the NFL, but not in Europe where football is much more than just another entertainment thing. The best clubs would have to be pulled out of their domestic leagues to compete in this new Euroleague because playing in two leagues simultaneously would not be possible. To crown a national champion is what matters to most supporters and that championship would be a joke without the best teams present. Football is the people's game and should remain so. It would become an upperclass and soleless game with the Euroleague. Only "men in suits" would be financially able to purchase tickets.
Plus, the other teams are left behind in a national league that misses some of its main players, eventually killing off the majority of clubs that are left behind in countries like Holland, Belgium, Scotland, Portugal and probably even France. And then there's the fact that travelling support will be minimized, ticket prices will increase even more... the atmosphere at games is certainly going to change for the worse (again) with the real support sitting at home. And when they turn their back on the club you'll have stadiums full of everything but football supporters and a lot of people very, very angry at their club. This might lead to some funny situations which might eventually make certain popular clubs a lot less popular. These clubs belong to the people. The clubs might disagree, but in the end many of the supporters have been around longer than the current board of directors. For a lot of supporters their footballclub is NOT just entertainment. It's a very important part of their life, their identity.... you name it. Many of these supporters have already seen their clubs change for the worse. More business, less soul. The Euroleague would be the last drop for many. Finally, I don't see any benefits. 1) European matches are special. They should be kept special. 2) It will not close the gap between clubs like Ajax and AC Milan... I don't see what Ajax should gain from this. 3) I like the Dutch away matches against clubs like Utrecht, Groningen, NAC, you name it... And these clubs need matches against Ajax, psv, feyenoord. 4) Money already destroys a lot of the fun. Don't let it do anymore damage.
Well I suppose it depends how you define 'suck' really. I believe if there was a Euro league run on American-style franchise lines then it would work. It would be popular. It would create a distinct elite set of clubs who'd be richer than all the others and be able to get the best players even more so than now. For those 20 or so clubs and their supporters it would be great. I'm sure you'd argue that in that case it would be a success. A better product through American style rationalising. What you have to appreciate is that unlike American sports where you have an elite set of teams competing for one prize and absolutely nothing else outside of that, in Europe there are literally hundreds of pro clubs who, along with their supporters, surprisingly have no desire to see their entire raison d'être wiped out just so a minority can make more money than they already do. The idea that football in Europe is about so much more than just determining a single European champion is absolutely fundamental in understanding why it's a bad idea.
That's just great. Forget the fact that millions of people follow teams that would come nowhere near the top 280, let alone the top 28 richest clubs in Europe. I find it incredible that it is even being seriously suggested that hundreds of clubs should be driven out of existence just to create a TV-friendly mega-rich elite competition (which the Champions League virtually is anyway) for US audiences to enjoy. Don't forget that in England alone more people in total go to watch non-Premership football than Premiership matches. The Euro-league is a horrific idea that ignores the traditions and huge variety of the game in favour of a quick-fix glamour contest. My club is almost going to the wall as it is, we are forced to sell our best young players every year in order to survive. The top clubs already siphon off a vastly disproportionate percentage of TV revenue, if a Euro-league were formed then we'd stand no chance. So to answer the original question, if I were in charge of a Euro super-league I'd make sure all revenue generated was spread out evenly amongst all FAs in every country involved. And I'd also include Cambridge United as founder members
I follow now. Basically, the EuroLeague would be a good thing for those in it, but only those in it. All others would suffer. Tradition suffers in order to see a huge elite league. I still like the idea of seeing top matches everyday, but I guess you can't argue with tradition.
For a lot of fanatic supporters at the clubs who are in it it wouldn't be good thing either. Ticket prices, travelling, traditional matches... you name it.
In principle, I'm against anything like a EuroLeague. However, if you were to put a gun to my head and make me come up with a EuroLeague plan, here's what I'd do... * Start with 18 clubs the first year: the last 16 of the most recent Champions League and the two finalists of the most recent UEFA Cup. * Play a normal home-and-away league schedule. * Force all EuroLeague clubs to play in their domestic cup competitions. * After the end of the "regular season", put the top 8 in two groups of 4, play home-and-away, group winners play a one-off for the championship. * Automatically relegate the bottom two to their domestic leagues. Replace them with 2 clubs that qualify from another competition (possibly Intertoto-style, with a group stage at the end?) * Draw ALL of the other 8 into 4 groups (2 to a group) with the 8 clubs from the previously-mentioned qualifying competition. Play home-and-away, top two in each group go into the EuroLeague, other two go to their domestic leagues. Basically, the idea is to tie the EuroLeague as closely as possible to the domestic game. More than half of the EuroLeague would have the possibility of relegation to domestic leagues each year.
If I was in charge of FIFA... Well first I'd move all the good teams to America... Just kidding. I'd pretty much leave everything the way it is, keeping the domestic leagues a huge priority. I'd only allow league champions in the champions league, that way it would be even more prestigious. The whole Euroleague idea is stupid. It would never work. Considering that most fans hold domestic competition in a higher regard than european competition, the idea of creating a full-time euroleague would just be ridiculous. Unfortunately, with G14 around, its always going to be a possibility.
I would restructure a system to not give the clubs more power than their respective national federations. I would redesign the pyramid and make a new look IFF (FIFA) and make international competitions with international sides more regular.
No EuroLeague but I would set up the Champion's League like this Using a league of about 20 teams as a model: Top 4 plus the winner of the FA Cup (or whatever Cup is most important) are in a group, each play home and away. Top 2 teams from each country (and every country) go to an actual Cup with home and away legs. Semifinal and Final are single match at 3 seperate neutral venues. Similar set up for UEFA Cup, maybe next 3 teams plus winner of secondary Cup and as a wild card, the team that won the secondary league. (This could help newly promoted teams to stay up and get them competitive in the top league more quickly). This would make European Cups more exclusive while at the same time allowing more clubs to participate. Ummm...That is totally contradictory. What I mean is that more teams would have a shot at European Competition, but it would be a bigger deal to be in the European competition proper (to make it out of your domestic group). Also, presumably the domestic groups would still get good TV money for the lesser clubs.
I'm not totally sure what you are proposing here, but you have to bear in mind that there are 52 nations in UEFA. OK, some of them such as San Marino and Liechtenstein don't have their own league, but taking the top 5 from each and putting them into a cup is going to give a very large number of teams. The knockout cup idea is essentially what used to happen though, pre-champions league. With a scrapping of the second group phase the cup will get back to being more like a cup.