TheAuthority Posted March 5, 2016 Author VT Supporter Share Posted March 5, 2016 I think I might actually watch a champions league game if Leicester were playing in it. 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Xela Posted March 5, 2016 Share Posted March 5, 2016 A European Breakaway League doesn't bother me but there needs to be conditions attached. They are: 1) If you leave, you can't come back. You will have left the Premier league and that's that. If the Breakaway league fails, you have start at the bottom of the chain again 2) You can't compete in any domestic cup competitions either 3) No English players playing for teams in the Breakaway league will be eligible to play for the English national team (bit like the English RFU with French based players) If the English FA had any balls, they'd propose that! 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zatman Posted March 24, 2016 Share Posted March 24, 2016 Quote The Champions League may feature fewer teams in the group stages under proposals being considered by Uefa. One suggestion is for more knockout rounds, leading to two 'super-league' groups of eight teams - the current format features eight groups of four. A spokesman told the Guardian Uefa was in "constant contact" with clubs but "no concrete proposals" were in place. The current structure is unlikely to change under the present TV rights deal, which runs to the end of 2017-18. The Champions League replaced the European Cup, which was a straight knockout competition, in 1992. There are currently three qualifying rounds and a play-off round, all played over two legs, then the group stage which features 32 teams divided into eight groups, with the top two in each group advancing to the knockout round of 16. The European Clubs' Association, led by former West Germany international striker Karl-Heinz Rummenigge, has held discussions regarding a tournament consisting of 20 teams from Italy, England, Spain, Germany and France. Inter Milan chief executive Michael Bolingbroke told the BBC this week that he saw merit in the idea of Champions League wildcards for teams that have not qualified through their league position. **** OFF UEFA http://www.bbc.com/sport/football/35888818?ns_mchannel=social&ns_campaign=bbc_match_of_the_day&ns_source=facebook&ns_linkname=sport Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
villa4europe Posted March 24, 2016 Share Posted March 24, 2016 14 games in the group stage, TV money is already £20m for the 8 games wildcards can **** off if they do introduce more qualifying rounds then seedings can **** off Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rodders Posted March 24, 2016 Share Posted March 24, 2016 a tournament consisting of 20 teams from Italy, England, Spain, Germany and France. you f**king paragraphs removed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
VillaChris Posted March 25, 2016 Share Posted March 25, 2016 Don't understand the format....a play off game to get in these group stages then FOURTEEN games and then the quarters....it's just going to be like the europa league and never ending.... And they have the cheek to complain about fixture congestion in the prem. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BG_Villa_Fan Posted March 25, 2016 Share Posted March 25, 2016 The 2 groups of 8 teams format is the same the basketball euroleague use. It's terrible and a lot of the games become much less important. As for the superleague, in the past I thought it would be the death of football, but I've changed my opinion completely - it might actually be exactly what football needs right now. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheAuthority Posted March 25, 2016 Author VT Supporter Share Posted March 25, 2016 14 hours ago, VillaChris said: And they have the cheek to complain about fixture congestion in the prem. I can soon see a time when domestic leagues throw out the home and away system. They'll have a computer algorithm which generates a supposedly 'fair' fixture list for everyone. This is the sort of system the NFL employs for it's scheduling. That would cut down those pesky games against the Bournemouths and Watfords of the world so the big boys have more time for European games and World club competitions. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
VillaChris Posted March 25, 2016 Share Posted March 25, 2016 I'm done with Football if they ever do that. As much as we all know there's a huge financial inbalance in football, at least the same principles apply as on day 1 in the 19th century, all teams play each other home and away and at the end the team with the most points wins the league and the three worst go down. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BG_Villa_Fan Posted March 25, 2016 Share Posted March 25, 2016 9 minutes ago, TheAuthority said: I can soon see a time when domestic leagues throw out the home and away system. They'll have a computer algorithm which generates a supposedly 'fair' fixture list for everyone. This is the sort of system the NFL employs for it's scheduling. That would cut down those pesky games against the Bournemouths and Watfords of the world so the big boys have more time for European games and World club competitions. There's no way this happens because of the TV deal. Premier league teams earn much more from the premier league than they do from the Champion's league. This is precisely one of the main reasons why this superleague question is raised up again. The team finishing bottom of the Prem league will earn twice as much as the winner of the Champion's league. It creates a great imbalance and teams like Juventus, Inter, Valencia, etc. would hate to be outbid easily by the likes of West Ham. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ThunderPower_14 Posted March 25, 2016 Share Posted March 25, 2016 I'm quite happy for it to all go ahead. It would be good for football, long term. The only condition i'd like to see in place (and i'm kidding myself), is that these superleague clubs aren't allowed to do the Chelsea and have 60 professional players with more than half of them on loan. A domestic league trophy means more than anything you can win in Europe, and the plastic, arsehole fans of some of these clubs don't appreciate how good they've got it, so shuffle them off to some megaleague and everyone else can start to enjoy football again without the expectation of playing several teams twice a year who are getting paid 5 times as much as your players. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheAuthority Posted March 25, 2016 Author VT Supporter Share Posted March 25, 2016 2 hours ago, BG_Villa_Fan said: There's no way this happens because of the TV deal. Premier league teams earn much more from the premier league than they do from the Champion's league. This is precisely one of the main reasons why this superleague question is raised up again. The team finishing bottom of the Prem league will earn twice as much as the winner of the Champion's league. It creates a great imbalance and teams like Juventus, Inter, Valencia, etc. would hate to be outbid easily by the likes of West Ham. I understand that the Premier League is currently the most financially successful league. The reason why the premier league earns so much money is because of the collective bargaining of just the clubs in the league. Before the PL all 92 league clubs in England bargained together but 72 of them were cut adrift when the PL was formed. What we are moving toward is the European version of that exact scenario. The likes of Juventus, Inter, AC Milan PLUS Real Madrid, Barcelona Manure, Man City and Chelsea will 'breakaway' and negotiate their own deals, cutting adrift anyone who isn't at their level. They will be able to command the highest TV money for themselves and screw everyone else. After that you will see a huge devaluation of the domestic league whatever it is called and the prize money (tv money) will be gone. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sne Posted March 25, 2016 Share Posted March 25, 2016 An NHL type super league who only releases players to internationals and the World Cup on their conditions? No relegation or promotion, just expansion if the right franchise is created. A total break away from FIFA/UEFA fueled by Russian, Chinese and Arab oil money? They could probably sell the idea ATM thanks to all the corruption. Games played in Tokyo, Beijing, L.A, Qatar... In the long run it could happen, money is all that matters. Fans are customers, those living abroad matters more than the sad few who follow their local team 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OutByEaster? Posted March 26, 2016 Moderator Share Posted March 26, 2016 I must admit, since the European football stopped being on the telly, I've found it much easier to ignore. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TrinityRoadSteps Posted March 26, 2016 Share Posted March 26, 2016 Why don't they just stop all the faffing about and go straight to the final between two clubs which could rotate every year between the clubs they want in. Barcelona, Real Madrid, Bayern, PSG, Man Utd, and Chelsea. And give each of them 100 squillion billion each. No more fixture congestion, no meaningless games, no chance of any oiks getting successful Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
coda Posted March 26, 2016 Share Posted March 26, 2016 Can't happen soon enough. So long, farewell, auf wiedershen, adieu Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MakemineVanilla Posted March 27, 2016 Share Posted March 27, 2016 With the average NFL team being worth $2bn and some worth $4bn, it is easy to see the incentives. It seems obvious that the motives for the ffp regulations have been about securing the status of the big clubs, as a means of moving slowly in that direction. It seems likely that once a European Superleague was established, the Premier League would follow suit as clubs would be offered incentives to accept it. Local fans would be offered cheap tickets as a sop as the clubs became financed by the global television market. Villa would naturally be invited to be an expansion club based upon their financial status and historical significance. Despite the rumours capitalist entities hate competition and eliminating it is generally their goal, either by monopoly or protection. Why would conglomerates like Fenway Sports Group buy Liverpool if they didn't see big returns some time in the future? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rob182 Posted March 27, 2016 Share Posted March 27, 2016 I had a 'good' idea for a new European competition which I was telling (trolling) to a baggies supporting mate at work. Imagine a competition which only includes teams who have ever won the European Cup/ Champions League. It's sort of a bonus to the elite clubs that have ever won it, irrespective of whether they've now - ahem - become crap and got relegated. My idea was that all the European Cup winning teams are in the hat, but only, say, 12 teams are picked. If you've won the Cup numerous times then you get numerous balls in the hat. Your team might not get picked, but that's why winning it is good, because you get an extra ball into this new 'European Cup Winners Tournament'. It was basically an idea I came up with to have a dig at a baggies fan, but then I thought it would actually be decent - having a little tournament where Notts Forest or Villa could randomly get drawn against Barca or Real. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HanoiVillan Posted March 27, 2016 Share Posted March 27, 2016 9 hours ago, MakemineVanilla said: With the average NFL team being worth $2bn and some worth $4bn, it is easy to see the incentives. It seems obvious that the motives for the ffp regulations have been about securing the status of the big clubs, as a means of moving slowly in that direction. It seems likely that once a European Superleague was established, the Premier League would follow suit as clubs would be offered incentives to accept it. Local fans would be offered cheap tickets as a sop as the clubs became financed by the global television market. Villa would naturally be invited to be an expansion club based upon their financial status and historical significance. Despite the rumours capitalist entities hate competition and eliminating it is generally their goal, either by monopoly or protection. Why would conglomerates like Fenway Sports Group buy Liverpool if they didn't see big returns some time in the future? Local fans could have been offered cheap tickets at any point during the last 25 years, instead ticket price rises have massively outstripped inflation. Why would that change now? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ThunderPower_14 Posted March 30, 2016 Share Posted March 30, 2016 Without a salary cap, a closed system doesn't work. A club like Liverpool would just get smashed every week and finish low on the table year in year out until their fans begged to come back to English football. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts