druryfire
member
Reged: 20/03/2007
Posts: 351
|
|
Hello to all, hope i can have my say on the debate.
The Champions League format is never going to alter too much, not since there is a commitee that sits around a table and make easy decisions that are forced upon them from the G-14.
An alternative, would be for UEFA to create another tournement. Maybe create a Champions League for the East Europeans and vice versa for the West Europeans.
At the end of each tournement, that would run along the same lines of the current format, the champions play off in what we curently call the European Super Cup.
So, there we go, cancel the now meaningless Uefa Cup, and run two competions, one for East and one for West.
Currently,must of the teams in the Champions League all come from the West, so they have nothing to worry about, they still get there'big four' into the competion, it also gives teams from such countries as Wales a qualifing match against Big European team, instead of travelling to Azerbaijan or somehwere and getting knocked out - this thus creates them more money from a two legged lucrative tie.
So this keeps all the big clubs in West Europe happy and the ninnows happy with big bucks for a two legged tie they would get beat in anyway.
The East of Europe have the same format, giving the likes of Red Star Belgrade playing Steaua Bucharest in meaningful matches (a poteintal final, instead of a bottom of the group match). This would also give more times from the Eastern Bloc' games in Europe that they have never had, matches closer to home, and a lot more competitive.
Ans, as i say, the winners of both competions play in the Super Cup, which currently does not mean a lot, but on this occasion, it would show who is the real champion of Europe!
Hope you liked my theroy, sorry about any mis-spelt words, hope its not too confusing
|
subhankar_mondal
member
Reged: 29/08/2006
Posts: 2003
|
|
Quote:
I agree that Eastern European champions shouldn't have to play more qualifying games than the 4th placed English/Italian/Spanish team etc, thats why the Champions League should be expanded. With more groups, there would be more places, and the quality would not drop because all the best teams would still be there, and the Eastern European teams would be able to compete on a more equal footing.
Reducing the quality of the Champions League is taking football backwards in my opinion.
That's not right,righteous1. The Champions League proper is already a 32 team competition and the expansion is only going to undermine the quality of the competition. When you sugges that the Eastern European champions are not forced to play too many qualifying matches,that's where you get it right but an expansion from 32 to,say 40 or 44,would only help and decimate the quality of football that we observe in the Champions League.
Maybe,UEFA could put two clubs from the same country in one group?
--------------------
Subhankar Mondal is a football writer for www.goal.com.
|
subhankar_mondal
member
Reged: 29/08/2006
Posts: 2003
|
|
Someone said about teams from the Big Three regularly moving into the QF and SF of the Champions League. If they are good enough to do so,then why stop them? If,say the Hungarian champions,are not capable enough to qualify for the group stage,then let them not do that. Let the teams with more depth,class and quality play in Europe's and the world's biggest club competition.
--------------------
Subhankar Mondal is a football writer for www.goal.com.
|
barney
member
Reged: 08/06/2006
Posts: 235
|
|
It's busier on here since the last time I checked.
Anyway, looking at it another way. The Champions League devalues the domestic championships. It matters less that a team actually wins the Premiership than they finish in the top four these days.
Going back to Righteous1's point about Liverpool's 2005 success compared to their win in 1977, the problem I have is that the group stages provides a get-out clause for all the big clubs. Upsets are so much less likely in the group stage than in a knockout tie. Newcastle lost their first 3 games a few years back and still managed to get through. It's this safety net that removes the potential for shocks. Prior to that, every game mattered.
Also, regardless of the relative ease with which clubs reached the final, few people would argue that in most seasons the best team in Europe won the competition each year.
Finally, Oxford che? Guevare or Valencia or both?
|
RichieC
member
Reged: 17/07/2006
Posts: 534
|
|
Quote:
Quote:
Personally, I feel all the european competitions were devalued when they allowed non champions into the European cup. To then call it the contrived 'champions league' (which technically should have an apostrophe somewhere in there) further devalues a once great competition. Champions League? Where are the champions? Liverpool were far from it when they won. Get back to what it chould be and stop pandering to the financial side of it. I agree with the direction Platini is going. The likelihood of his succeeding is sadly small.
Richie
While I agree that the name of the tournament should be changed, its only a name, and people seem to be hung up on what is a minor issue.
True, it's not exactly the most important issue in football  but it's a pointer to the over commercialised nature...an exercise in rebranding, which, though maybe not important on its own, still irks and has wider implications, the main one of which being that money is more important than anything else. Part of the problem has comne because the European Cup has become the Champions League. The European Championships and World Cup Finals all have 'qualifying stages' with European teams getting more places. One could look at the champions league in a similar manner, as it is afterall, a competition to find the best team in europe. However, I do firmly believe that ALL domestic champions should not have to go through qualification.
Also, as a grammatical footnote, Champions League should have an apostrophe somewhere in there (as i originally said) as a league of champions should technically be the "Champions' League", as the league comprises "champions". "Champion's Leage" would indicate a league with a champion, which is more what it really is.
|
Oxford_Che
member
Reged: 19/03/2007
Posts: 4
|
|
Quote:
Finally, Oxford che? Guevare or Valencia or both?
Valencia, the city and the football club.
|
righteous1
member
Reged: 16/03/2007
Posts: 553
|
|
Quote:
Maybe,UEFA could put two clubs from the same country in one group?
Definitely agree here Subhankar. There should be no national protection at any level of the competition, so what if 3 teams from England are drawn in the same group? it would make it very exciting, and they would still play plenty of 'foreign' teams if they progressed.
Going back to the point about the size of the competition, it would have to be a massive competition just to fit every national champion in. Since the break up of the Soviet Union, Yugoslavia, Czechoslovakia, there are infintely more national champions than there once were. Based on the Euro2008 qualifying groups alone there are over 40 national championships.
|
Sam
member
Reged: 12/07/2006
Posts: 1063
Loc: North Somerset (returning to M...
|
|
Sub, the most sensible thing you've said since this discussion started! (Kidding, obviously!) It's a nice compromise between the two positions (i.e. yours and mine). Perhaps an end to seeding could also be introduced - let's have a truly random draw.
And Richie...
Quote:
as a grammatical footnote, Champions League should have an apostrophe somewhere in there (as i originally said) as a league of champions should technically be the "Champions' League", as the league comprises "champions". "Champion's Leage" would indicate a league with a champion, which is more what it really is.
"Champions' League" would be a league BELONGING to the champions (plural), whereas "Champion's League" would be a league belonging to one singular champion, and in British English when talking about a team sport (as opposed to American English where teams are referred to as 'it' rather than 'they'), wouldn't make any sense.
That is, I'm agreeing that it doesn't really make sense without the apostrophe, but it wouldn't necessarily make any more sense WITH it, either.
And 'European Champion Clubs' Cup' is a far better name anyway.
Sam
--------------------
More fútbol argentino than you can shake a mullet at - Hasta El Gol Siempre
|
subhankar_mondal
member
Reged: 29/08/2006
Posts: 2003
|
|
"Champions' League" would mean that the competition is being played solely amongst the various champions of the European nations and that's not the case with the current structure of the competition at all. I do agree that there ought to be an apostrophe after "s" rather than before "s" but maybe psychologics suggest that it's better off without the small matter of the apostrophe. To me,it does look sexy without it.
--------------------
Subhankar Mondal is a football writer for www.goal.com.
|
subhankar_mondal
member
Reged: 29/08/2006
Posts: 2003
|
|
Someone put the 2003-2004 version of the Champions League in perspective. That was a one-off and moreover,it was absolutely crazy,the way the competition ran that particular season. PSV,Monaco,Depor and Porto went to the Champions League semi-finals,Depor the impressive of them all,winning 4-0 at the Riazor in the return leg after bowing down 4-1 to Milan at the San Siro. But that doesn't consolidate Platinis stance really. Less privileged clubs where?
--------------------
Subhankar Mondal is a football writer for www.goal.com.
|
subhankar_mondal
member
Reged: 29/08/2006
Posts: 2003
|
|
Quote:
However, I do firmly believe that ALL domestic champions should not have to go through qualification.
All domestic champions do not have to go through the qualification stages. Only those from the under par leagues are thrown into the pot and if they cannot then beat a third or fourth placed team from England,spain or Italy,then they have no right to enter into the group stage proper.
--------------------
Subhankar Mondal is a football writer for www.goal.com.
|
RichieC
member
Reged: 17/07/2006
Posts: 534
|
|
What i meant was that i believe that all domestic champions should not have to qualify...i.e. Champions from ALL the leagues, minor or not, should go straight through to the group stages. Sure, one can argue that Liverpool or Man U are clearly better than the winners of a minor league, however, that club is still their country's champion and that, as far as i'm concerned, gives them more right to enter the group stages than a 3rd or 4th placed team. Of course we could solve this issue by re-branding the qualification stages as the '1st round'
As for the apostrophe issue, irrespective of where the apostrophe goes, my point was that it's grammatically incorrect without one at all... 
|
druryfire
member
Reged: 20/03/2007
Posts: 351
|
|
I think everyone has to look at the bigger picture.
The Champions League format will never change. We the supporters are the ones who want to see the best clubs taking part, and they are from England, Spain and Italy.
UEFA need to think a different stratergy, get together with the Eastern European Clubs and think of another tournement for them to take part in, with the same sort of money availble as the current Champions League
They need to maybe take a look at Basketball, currently, England Basketball national team play in Group B of the elite, there are two elites Group A and B.
Put the lesser nations in group B and the winners qualify for Group A the following season.
The worst countries from group A get demoted to Group B.
This format should still keep big Western Countries happy as they will not get demoted, because they are too strong, but smaller countries in Group A will have to fight tooth and nail in every game to avoid relegation to Group B whilst Group B becomes more competitve as there is a goal to reach.
This goal can be reached whenyou are at the top of your game against other countries with similar financial capabilites. Once they progress well in group B they should be given the chance of progression into Group A, if they stuggle in group B then we already no that they shouldn't particpate in group A because simply thye are not strong enough.
The lesser countries should maybe try to help themselves, just like the Royal League, if teams play more european football against oposition like themselves, then they will get better and better.
But instead they stick to Domestic football, of which only a couple of teams can compete.
So, the FA's of Serbia, Croatia, Moldova, Albania, etc should get together, form a unique competion to themselves and then progress from there.
Thy have to help themselves rather than just sit and wait, cos it will never happen, only chance of happening is if the UEFA board was all eastern europeans.
|
RichieC
member
Reged: 17/07/2006
Posts: 534
|
|
Quote:
The Champions League format will never change.
We the supporters are the ones who want to see the best clubs taking part, and they are from England, Spain and Italy.
Part of the problem with the champions league is that it hasn't stopped changing for about the last 10 years...someone needs to have the balls (pardon the expression) to come out and say 'look, this isn't the european cup where all domestic winners competed against each other, this is a cash driven european club league, which we're slowly but surely moulding into a European league proper...'
Personally speaking I don't wish to see a European Cup with loads of 4th placed teams in it, whethere they're from Spain, England or Albania. I want to see a European Cup with the Champions (that's the 'winners') of each country in it, which is what we once had.
I do actually like the idea of a European club league, even in its current format, but i don't like the way the european cup has been twisted to fit it, though i suppose it was the only way some form of european league could be formed via the back door as even the mere mention of a proper euro league is shunned every time it's mentioned.
|
druryfire
member
Reged: 20/03/2007
Posts: 351
|
|
I think we all know that the format and number of entries will not alter, not unless the UEFA commitee changes to a completey Eastern European board.
So, first they need to challenage the current members, and get a foot in the door.
Secondly, it seems they only want more entries because they want more money, whatever happened to competitive football matches?
UEFA's best interest is too start a new competition aimed at 2nd ranking countries and give them competitive football in the knowledge of playing matches against teams of the same standard and also the incentive of some prize money.
UEFA need to look at the Asian Confederation, see that they have the Champions League for countries that have matured in their football and the AFC Cup for developing countries, which in Europes case could be classed as Moldova, Georgia, Ukraine, Azerbaijan, Austria, Slovakia, the list goes on.
Or simply the 16 countries that qualify for the Euro 2008 championships have there teams represented in Tournement A and non-qualifers in another tournement.
The format stays like that until the next International qualifying competition.
This would also generate more interest for players playing for there country as it also boasts there club competition and stops the no-nonsense injuries
|
Sam
member
Reged: 12/07/2006
Posts: 1063
Loc: North Somerset (returning to M...
|
|
Quote:
UEFA need to look at the Asian Confederation, see that they have the Champions League for countries that have matured in their football and the AFC Cup for developing countries, which in Europes case could be classed as Moldova, Georgia, Ukraine, Azerbaijan, Austria, Slovakia, the list goes on.
Or simply the 16 countries that qualify for the Euro 2008 championships have there teams represented in Tournement A and non-qualifers in another tournement.
The first paragraph is a very good point. Similar to what I said above about the 'Baltic Champions League' (I don't know if's actually officially called that, by the way), but I'd forgotten that there's a confederation who actually use such a format as officially sanctioned already.
The second paragraph I'm not so sure about, I don't know if I agree with equating the strength of a national team to that of the country's league (look at Spain, for instance). Although if UEFA implemented such an idea it would explain Scotland's appeal to increase the Euros to 24 nations!
Sam
--------------------
More fútbol argentino than you can shake a mullet at - Hasta El Gol Siempre
|
subhankar_mondal
member
Reged: 29/08/2006
Posts: 2003
|
|
The fact is that the Champions League format isn't going to change and so we need to eke out a new solution to bring the club teans from the less privileged nations.
Suggestion of a Champions League alike for the East European nations are noble enough but I doubt whether this is going to solve the problem fully. How many of the people would actually watch teams from Albania,Georgia or Malta play even if the competition be termed as the East European Champions League? I doubt whether everyone here or anywhere outside the regions know who are the reigning champions of these nations or who leads the tables there at the moment! Of course,theoritically the plan is feasible but when you actually put it into practice,it does attract scepticism and potential failure.
--------------------
Subhankar Mondal is a football writer for www.goal.com.
|
Gaius
member
Reged: 22/03/2007
Posts: 7
|
|
I live in Denmark and can only agree if some of you think Danish sides have no place in the Champions League based on the quality of our domestic football. The few Danish clubs that have made the group stage over the years haven`t exactly made a big impression.
I also agree with those of you who argue that the best players from "lower quality football nations" will seek out wealthier clubs abroad even if their own teams make the CL on a regular basis.
The issue is the money these clubs could make. That money would be well spent improving the home game especially in eastern countries. Better stadiums, better training facilities, better youth programmes and a better living for the players in general.
Scandinavian clubs have all those things and simply have to accept the fact that they don`t have a leg to stand on in Europe. Obviously they don`t have the money to sign big international stars, but the economy is generally sound and more often than not they play in excellent stadiums. The downside is that the fans are likely to miss out on exciting international competitions, but there are allways the national teams who mostly do okay.
The Eastern and Scandinavian clubs will never compete on the highest level in Europe even if the big four are cut to TWO teams each in the CL. Come the quarter finals, there`ll be no more surprising upsets and the usual suspects will be left to compete for the ultimate triumph.
However, thousands of fans in lower ranking European countries would experience a better game in better grounds domestically if they stood a better chance of reaching the group stage of the Wealthiest`s League. That would basically be pretty cool. G-14 and the like has been milking European football dry for years and it´s simply time they gave something back.
Who knows? We might even see a club or two hitting it big after a few years. God knows it`s boring to watch Real Madrid versus Man United or Bayern Munich versus Fc Barcelona for the 100th time. Scandinavian teams have had their chance several times, but simply lack the ability to go all the way. Eastern Europe haven`t even had a shot yet (as far as I remember) and deserve a fighting chance. Forza Platini.
|
druryfire
member
Reged: 20/03/2007
Posts: 351
|
|
Sub,
What would your solution be?
Personally, i can't see any change, no fans want to see a change to the quality of the comp, so why should UEFA try to change the comp.
They simply just need to bring in something for the minor nations, but if the minor nations want something they should help themselves and try to bring something to the table and just let UEFA say its 'good to go' as and when they have a format for themselves.
They can still particpate in the Champions League but have something else for them when they fail and cannot access the UEFA Cup
|
druryfire
member
Reged: 20/03/2007
Posts: 351
|
|
Another option i can think of is:
Currently, Scandanavia has the Royal League, maybe just the winners of this comp enter the champions league, you then just have the strongest entry from that region.
A Baltic League winner could progress again.
The losers enter the UEFA Cup for example
|
Previous
Index
Next
Threaded
[Re: 
Edit
Reply
Quote
