Righteous, welcome to the forum first of all. And admin, good idea for a new section to it!
I remember having a debate with Subhankar a few months ago about the format for the Champs League. Personally the group stages bore me rigid, almost entirely without exception (Barca's matches against Chelsea this season and against Man United in 1998-1999 being the exceptions), and are one example of how the competition is tailored to allow the big clubs to make ever more money from football's biggest cash cow.
I don't think anyone would argue with the statement that allowing more champions from smaller footballing nations into the competition is a good idea. I wouldn't agree with expanding the competition, I think it's bloated enough already and scrapping the UEFA Cup would take away one platform on which eastern European teams CAN actually compete on something like a level footing - OK, none are in the latter stages this season, but they have been recently and CSKA won the thing a couple of seasons ago. It would also, of course, dilute the overall quality of the Champs League. Not to mention making it a little boring having too many sides from two or three nations in the draw.
Personally, I like Platini's idea of reducing England, Spain and Italy's quota to three clubs, or at least forcing them to play off against each other in the third qualifying round. Part of the draw of the competition for me is the exoticism of it, and seeing the same sides every season (particularly from the Premiership) isn't the best way of ensuring excitement. And whether it's called the Champions League or the European Cup, should the fourth best team in ANY country really be allowed into it?
I agree about 'rolling back' the name, though. I'm only 22 but I still prefer to call it the European Cup in conversation. Champions League is just so... garish.
Sam
--------------------
More fútbol argentino than you can shake a mullet at - Hasta El Gol Siempre
|
Previous
Index
Next
Flat
Re: The Big Issue
Edit
Reply
Quote
