Changes in the Champions League?

bedir than average · January 26th, 2007, 11:58 AM

The new UEFA President wants to eliminate England, Germany and Italy's exception to the 3 team maximum. Each now gets four teams in the CL.

Obviously the English FA Managers object. Sir Alex is one of the most vocal that object to the concept.

I haven't read yet who would get the three new slots though.

Overall I think this is a good idea. I'm not a fan of a Champions League where qualifiers were only fourth best in their home league.

bedir than average · January 28th, 2007, 10:24 AM

Al Jazeera English - Sport

It seems the three open slots would got to Andorra, SanMarino and Montenegro.

Wiggen · January 30th, 2007, 09:38 AM

Sorry Bedir, but I must disagree. Just using the Premier League as an example, that would mean probably eliminating either Manchester United, Chelsea, Liverpool, or Arsenal and replacing them with a team from San Marino or Montenegro?

I don't think so. The Champions League is for the best teams in the world, not for representation from any country than has a league, no matter the quality. We all know the fourth best team in England, Germany, or Italy is going to be significantly better than the best teams from a number of countries currently in the Champions League. I am not in favor of watering it down any.

bedir than average · February 1st, 2007, 07:52 AM

I just am one to think that if you can't even place third in your home FA why should you be permitted to participate. Of course, than this guy gives the slots to countries small enough they don't even have leagues (basically) which is also wrong. By FIFA there are what 50 nations in Europe? There have to be nations being left out that have better leagues than those he added.

Sneekes · February 2nd, 2007, 01:50 PM

I think the extra places going to teams from Andorra, San marino & Montanegro just means that these teams from these nations will enter the qualifying competition - they most likely will not make the 1st round proper.
I'm for this move by Platini as it means that the actual champions of some of the middle tier nations (eg: Belgium, Sweden, Serbia, Austria, Switzerland, Poland) are more likely to make the groups stages.
It means my team (Everton) are less likely to ever make it - but I think it's good for the future of football in Europe. Anything that hurts G14 is welcome in my book.

Wiggen · February 2nd, 2007, 07:30 PM

Again, I would respectfully disagree. The net result is that if you are a very good team playing in a highly competitive league, you get punished. Be an average team playing in a lousy league, and you get rewarded. Teams from Poland and Belgium and Switzerland are never going to be on par with teams from the big European leagues because they don't have the talent or the financial means to compete. It doesn't matter how many Champions League positions they get.

Some of those leagues are comparable to second division leagues in the big three.

bravesmasta · February 3rd, 2007, 06:29 PM

I have to agree woth Wiggen...How do you think these teams would do in the EPL?

bedir than average · February 4th, 2007, 11:51 AM

They wouldn't win, but neither is the #4 team in the EPL. How can it be a "Champions" League when dozens of teams not good enough to win their own league get in?

bravesmasta · February 4th, 2007, 01:07 PM

Don't take the title too seriously,the World Series is'nt the World Series..One of those teams would'nt even get top 8 in the EPL or one of the top leagus....
Champions League is for the best European Clubs in the world....

bedir than average · February 5th, 2007, 05:16 PM

I've already stated that adding the three that he thinks is the wrong idea.

I would rather a #2 or #3 from league like France, Netherlands and Spain would be better for the overall game. Andorra and SanMarino shouldn't be competing in this.

Wiggen · February 6th, 2007, 09:19 AM

Yeah, the Champions League as applying only to league champions simply doesn't cut it with me either. If that's the criteria, then why not have only the league champions from each country particiapting?

I much perfer the current system where you have a select number of places and they are allotted to the best teams. I'd make the argument that in most years, the 4th place team from Germany or England or Italy (although not this year) is better than the second or third place teams from those countries only getting one entry now.

bedir than average · February 6th, 2007, 09:21 AM

4th in England better than 3rd in Spain?

And yes there is a Cup Winners Cup for just league winners, which has seemed to me to be a redundant competition.

Wiggen · February 6th, 2007, 09:25 AM

Yes. There are essentially only two very good teams in Spain - Barcelona and Real Madrid. I think either Man U., Arsenal, Chelsea, or Liverpool are better than the third place team in Spain, or probably any team in France.

TST · February 12th, 2007, 06:42 AM

Quote:

Yeah, the Champions League as applying only to league champions simply doesn't cut it with me either. If that's the criteria, then why not have only the league champions from each country particiapting?

Note that this was the case up to around 10 years ago. It's a recent development that more than one team from each country can play in the CL.

Quote:

And yes there is a Cup Winners Cup for just league winners, which has seemed to me to be a redundant competition.

The cup winner's cup no longer exists. All cup winners are qualified for the Uefa Cup, to play vs teams that finish the league just below the CL spots.

Quote:

Yes. There are essentially only two very good teams in Spain - Barcelona and Real Madrid. I think either Man U., Arsenal, Chelsea, or Liverpool are better than the third place team in Spain, or probably any team in France.

Sevilla is one of the best teams in Europe right now, and definitely at the same level as say Liverpool. Depor and Valencia are top teams as well. Look at the CL results of the last years and you'll see Spain do a lot better than the British teams. Also don't forget Lyon, which at the first half of this season were the best team in Europe. They've been at that level for a number of years now, so they're no one-day-fly either.

Cali Ed · February 13th, 2007, 10:06 AM

As a newbie, I want to add my 2 cents to this discussion.

It seems to me that Platini is trying to create an "ideal universe" in which small, mid-sized and large nations would be "treated equally" in the opportunity to get the revenues from the CL competitions.

Unfortunately for him, his ideal universe is a LONG way from reality. Who really wants to see the league champions from Montenegro, or the 2nd place Swiss or Bulgarian teams, compete over the 4th place team from England, Spain or Italy? It's "all about the Benjamins" in sporting competitions, and I don't think that the "powers that be" (read TELEVISION BROADCASTERS) would pay top money for a lesser-quality competition.

So while it might seem "fairer" to all involved, in reality it's something most would rather not watch. I mean, could you imagine the crowds at OT or Camp Nou to watch a group stage match against the champions of Andorra or San Marino?

The sooner Platini decides to shelve this idiot idea, the better. Or you might just see the long-rumoured "European Super League" created by the G14.

PS: FWIW, I'm the co-mod of the soccer forums over at thescoreboards.com, but the number of participants in there isn't as great as I'd like, so I decided to join here to get into more general discussions.

January 26th, 2007, 11:58 AM	#1 (permalink)
bedir than average Hall of Famer Join Date: Nov 2006 Location: Starbucks Posts: 8,258	Changes in the Champions League? The new UEFA President wants to eliminate England, Germany and Italy's exception to the 3 team maximum. Each now gets four teams in the CL. Obviously the English FA Managers object. Sir Alex is one of the most vocal that object to the concept. I haven't read yet who would get the three new slots though. Overall I think this is a good idea. I'm not a fan of a Champions League where qualifiers were only fourth best in their home league. __________________ I'm sorry I left for a while. I needed a vaction, and then work changed substantially. I'm over 50 hour weeks, plus two hours a day of commuting time. A few weeks ago I launched my own blog about Seattle Sounders FC and Life in Puget Sound. I won't be by these parts often as my focus has changed. Sorry about the unannounced retirement.

January 28th, 2007, 10:24 AM	#2 (permalink)
bedir than average Hall of Famer Join Date: Nov 2006 Location: Starbucks Posts: 8,258	Al Jazeera English - Sport It seems the three open slots would got to Andorra, SanMarino and Montenegro. __________________ I'm sorry I left for a while. I needed a vaction, and then work changed substantially. I'm over 50 hour weeks, plus two hours a day of commuting time. A few weeks ago I launched my own blog about Seattle Sounders FC and Life in Puget Sound. I won't be by these parts often as my focus has changed. Sorry about the unannounced retirement.

February 1st, 2007, 07:52 AM	#4 (permalink)
bedir than average Hall of Famer Join Date: Nov 2006 Location: Starbucks Posts: 8,258	I just am one to think that if you can't even place third in your home FA why should you be permitted to participate. Of course, than this guy gives the slots to countries small enough they don't even have leagues (basically) which is also wrong. By FIFA there are what 50 nations in Europe? There have to be nations being left out that have better leagues than those he added. __________________ I'm sorry I left for a while. I needed a vaction, and then work changed substantially. I'm over 50 hour weeks, plus two hours a day of commuting time. A few weeks ago I launched my own blog about Seattle Sounders FC and Life in Puget Sound. I won't be by these parts often as my focus has changed. Sorry about the unannounced retirement.

February 3rd, 2007, 06:29 PM	#7 (permalink)
bravesmasta Member Join Date: Dec 2006 Location: jawjya Posts: 55	I have to agree woth Wiggen...How do you think these teams would do in the EPL? __________________ Support 2K

February 4th, 2007, 11:51 AM	#8 (permalink)
bedir than average Hall of Famer Join Date: Nov 2006 Location: Starbucks Posts: 8,258	They wouldn't win, but neither is the #4 team in the EPL. How can it be a "Champions" League when dozens of teams not good enough to win their own league get in? __________________ I'm sorry I left for a while. I needed a vaction, and then work changed substantially. I'm over 50 hour weeks, plus two hours a day of commuting time. A few weeks ago I launched my own blog about Seattle Sounders FC and Life in Puget Sound. I won't be by these parts often as my focus has changed. Sorry about the unannounced retirement.

January 30th, 2007, 09:38 AM	#3 (permalink)
Wiggen Hall of Famer Join Date: Nov 2006 Posts: 5,287	Sorry Bedir, but I must disagree. Just using the Premier League as an example, that would mean probably eliminating either Manchester United, Chelsea, Liverpool, or Arsenal and replacing them with a team from San Marino or Montenegro? I don't think so. The Champions League is for the best teams in the world, not for representation from any country than has a league, no matter the quality. We all know the fourth best team in England, Germany, or Italy is going to be significantly better than the best teams from a number of countries currently in the Champions League. I am not in favor of watering it down any.

February 2nd, 2007, 01:50 PM	#5 (permalink)
Sneekes Member Join Date: Dec 2006 Location: Southport, UK Posts: 11	I think the extra places going to teams from Andorra, San marino & Montanegro just means that these teams from these nations will enter the qualifying competition - they most likely will not make the 1st round proper. I'm for this move by Platini as it means that the actual champions of some of the middle tier nations (eg: Belgium, Sweden, Serbia, Austria, Switzerland, Poland) are more likely to make the groups stages. It means my team (Everton) are less likely to ever make it - but I think it's good for the future of football in Europe. Anything that hurts G14 is welcome in my book.

February 2nd, 2007, 07:30 PM	#6 (permalink)
Wiggen Hall of Famer Join Date: Nov 2006 Posts: 5,287	Again, I would respectfully disagree. The net result is that if you are a very good team playing in a highly competitive league, you get punished. Be an average team playing in a lousy league, and you get rewarded. Teams from Poland and Belgium and Switzerland are never going to be on par with teams from the big European leagues because they don't have the talent or the financial means to compete. It doesn't matter how many Champions League positions they get. Some of those leagues are comparable to second division leagues in the big three.

February 4th, 2007, 01:07 PM	#9 (permalink)
bravesmasta Member Join Date: Dec 2006 Location: jawjya Posts: 55	Don't take the title too seriously,the World Series is'nt the World Series..One of those teams would'nt even get top 8 in the EPL or one of the top leagus.... Champions League is for the best European Clubs in the world.... __________________ Support 2K

February 5th, 2007, 05:16 PM	#10 (permalink)
bedir than average Hall of Famer Join Date: Nov 2006 Location: Starbucks Posts: 8,258	I've already stated that adding the three that he thinks is the wrong idea. I would rather a #2 or #3 from league like France, Netherlands and Spain would be better for the overall game. Andorra and SanMarino shouldn't be competing in this. __________________ I'm sorry I left for a while. I needed a vaction, and then work changed substantially. I'm over 50 hour weeks, plus two hours a day of commuting time. A few weeks ago I launched my own blog about Seattle Sounders FC and Life in Puget Sound. I won't be by these parts often as my focus has changed. Sorry about the unannounced retirement.

February 6th, 2007, 09:19 AM	#11 (permalink)
Wiggen Hall of Famer Join Date: Nov 2006 Posts: 5,287	Yeah, the Champions League as applying only to league champions simply doesn't cut it with me either. If that's the criteria, then why not have only the league champions from each country particiapting? I much perfer the current system where you have a select number of places and they are allotted to the best teams. I'd make the argument that in most years, the 4th place team from Germany or England or Italy (although not this year) is better than the second or third place teams from those countries only getting one entry now.

February 6th, 2007, 09:21 AM	#12 (permalink)
bedir than average Hall of Famer Join Date: Nov 2006 Location: Starbucks Posts: 8,258	4th in England better than 3rd in Spain? And yes there is a Cup Winners Cup for just league winners, which has seemed to me to be a redundant competition. __________________ I'm sorry I left for a while. I needed a vaction, and then work changed substantially. I'm over 50 hour weeks, plus two hours a day of commuting time. A few weeks ago I launched my own blog about Seattle Sounders FC and Life in Puget Sound. I won't be by these parts often as my focus has changed. Sorry about the unannounced retirement.

February 6th, 2007, 09:25 AM	#13 (permalink)
Wiggen Hall of Famer Join Date: Nov 2006 Posts: 5,287	Yes. There are essentially only two very good teams in Spain - Barcelona and Real Madrid. I think either Man U., Arsenal, Chelsea, or Liverpool are better than the third place team in Spain, or probably any team in France.

February 13th, 2007, 10:06 AM	#15 (permalink)
Cali Ed Member Join Date: Feb 2007 Location: Pasadena, CA Posts: 102	As a newbie, I want to add my 2 cents to this discussion. It seems to me that Platini is trying to create an "ideal universe" in which small, mid-sized and large nations would be "treated equally" in the opportunity to get the revenues from the CL competitions. Unfortunately for him, his ideal universe is a LONG way from reality. Who really wants to see the league champions from Montenegro, or the 2nd place Swiss or Bulgarian teams, compete over the 4th place team from England, Spain or Italy? It's "all about the Benjamins" in sporting competitions, and I don't think that the "powers that be" (read TELEVISION BROADCASTERS) would pay top money for a lesser-quality competition. So while it might seem "fairer" to all involved, in reality it's something most would rather not watch. I mean, could you imagine the crowds at OT or Camp Nou to watch a group stage match against the champions of Andorra or San Marino? The sooner Platini decides to shelve this idiot idea, the better. Or you might just see the long-rumoured "European Super League" created by the G14. PS: FWIW, I'm the co-mod of the soccer forums over at thescoreboards.com, but the number of participants in there isn't as great as I'd like, so I decided to join here to get into more general discussions. __________________ 96-66, best record in the majors! GO TRIBE!