Champions League to increase to 36 teams from 2024

Isn't the UEFA Conference league starting next season as well? The calendar is gonna be mental.
 
rcoobc said:
They've got to really consider how many teams make it into the knockouts.

Earlier reports were talking about 24 teams. That would destroy the competition as many teams would qualify after 5 or 6 of their 10 matches and would put out B teams for the remainder. Or they'd put weaker teams out throughout, confident that a sub-par performance would still get them through regardless (which to be fair, SAF used to do in the current system, sometimes failing)
Click to expand...
I read somewhere, the top 8 would qualify for next season CL. So there is some motivation to play well in these games until the end.
 
With the transfer rule and new European tournaments, if you have a bad season and fail to qualify for the CL, you're pretty fecked.

All the big sides will target your best players as they're the only ones they can buy, and you get stuck having to factor in playing in a draining but low level/interest competition that derails rebuilding plans.

I don't get how the attempts at market control can have any positive impact. New money will simply be directed into clubs currently unable to qualify for European tournaments as they're the only ones that sugar daddy owners will have full control over.
 
So teams who have good seasons like Ajax and Monaco can keep a hold of their squads a bit longer? Wonder how frustrated the players would be who want to leave
 
groovyalbert said:
With the transfer rule and new European tournaments, if you have a bad season and fail to qualify for the CL, you're pretty fecked.

All the big sides will target your best players as they're the only ones they can buy, and you get stuck having to factor in playing in a draining but low level/interest competition that derails rebuilding plans.

I don't get how the attempts at market control can have any positive impact. New money will simply be directed into clubs currently unable to qualify for European tournaments as they're the only ones that sugar daddy owners will have full control over.
Click to expand...
If you had been doing well for a period of time, the coefficient may be your saving grace. One of the key aspect of this reform. If you're doing badly for more than the coefficient can cover your ass, then you deserve whatever coming your way.

CL sides buy, but they have to sell too, especially now players don't have the luxury of joining a CL club then joining another CL team the quickest. Players would be more careful about joining star stacked CL teams if they care about playing.

A team out of CL can still demand high fee for their best players, as CL clubs can't buy directly from one another, the pool of quality players they can tap into is smaller. That selling club if it's competent, they can use the money to rebuild. It's better than playing CL to showcase their players, then being poached the following season, and not having time to plan to stay in CL.

New money pumped into non CL clubs would be less danger to the established CL sides. The new rich kids even when they break into CL, wouldn't just directly take the CL veterans' place. Keeping decorated teams competitive while allowing new money is the aim. In contrary, the way it is right now the new money would eventually kill even the most decorated clubs in the long run. FFP is proven to be useless.
 
Last edited:
They need to rename the tournament because it ain't Champions that play in it anymore.

Can't wait to draw Switzerlands third place team in the group stages that's what elite European football is made of!
 
Yet another proposed change to protect the status quo of the big clubs. If the likes of Barca go financially bust it’s their fault for spending beyond their means and hogging top players. Let them go to the wall
 
Green_Red said:
They need to rename the tournament because it ain't Champions that play in it anymore.

Can't wait to draw Switzerlands third place team in the group stages that's what elite European football is made of!
Click to expand...

It’s four extra teams. I know you’re probably being sarcastic, but it’s rare that the Swiss champions get in.

If you actually wanted to have the champions from each country, then yes, you’ll end up dropping the quality considerably. So what’s your issue?
 
Ladron de redcafe said:
A champions' league doesn't mean a league that happens to include champions. If so, then every league in the world, in every continent is its own champions' league.

The precursor to this modern format was a cup competition in which only champions qualified, and @Bondi77 and many others feel that "champions League" is a misnomer if it includes 4th and 5th placed teams that were never crowned champions.
Click to expand...
Glad someone could work it out.
 
Dan_F said:
It’s four extra teams. I know you’re probably being sarcastic, but it’s rare that the Swiss champions get in.

If you actually wanted to have the champions from each country, then yes, you’ll end up dropping the quality considerably. So what’s your issue?
Click to expand...
I was being sarcastic but the issue is that the CL is already a bloated competition. You could easily remove one group and the quality would go up.
 
Green_Red said:
I was being sarcastic but the issue is that the CL is already a bloated competition. You could easily remove one group and the quality would go up.
Click to expand...

But then who do you take out? Champions of a small country or 4th place from the EPL. A lot of smaller teams need the money from the Europa and Champions League
 
I like this rule about CL teams not being able to sign players from other CL teams. Sure, as one of the established clubs it makes things more difficult for us, but on the flip side, when you have a team like Monaco, or Spurs back in the day, who qualify for the CL, rather than having their players instantly poached by the bigger teams, they get a chance to build on it. For the good of football, I think it's a worthwhile move. It means that United also has to get more creative with scouting, rather than just lobbing money at a club for a Matic, Sancho etc.
 
Cloud7 said:
I like this rule about CL teams not being able to sign players from other CL teams. Sure, as one of the established clubs it makes things more difficult for us, but on the flip side, when you have a team like Monaco, or Spurs back in the day, who qualify for the CL, rather than having their players instantly poached by the bigger teams, they get a chance to build on it. For the good of football, I think it's a worthwhile move. It means that United also has to get more creative with scouting, rather than just lobbing money at a club for a Matic, Sancho etc.
Click to expand...
I don’t like it, transfers are part and parcel of football. Sometimes a Barca reserve might be a good fit for another CL team for example Arsenal (when they are in it). Also you will have players who are out of favour with their coach unable to move to another CL club? It won’t work for that reason alone, footballing slaves and all that.
I also can’t help but think this somehow protects the status quo of the big clubs, they nab all the best players from the non-CL clubs

nah, not for me.
 
adexkola said:
When I seize power I am firing whoever suggested this idea out of a cannon into the sun

Then I will kick non cha
Click to expand...
Did UEFA assassinate adex halfway through the sentence? I'm a little worried.
 
Cloud7 said:
I like this rule about CL teams not being able to sign players from other CL teams. Sure, as one of the established clubs it makes things more difficult for us, but on the flip side, when you have a team like Monaco, or Spurs back in the day, who qualify for the CL, rather than having their players instantly poached by the bigger teams, they get a chance to build on it. For the good of football, I think it's a worthwhile move. It means that United also has to get more creative with scouting, rather than just lobbing money at a club for a Matic, Sancho etc.
Click to expand...

It is also a clear breach of free movement and a ridiculous idea. If a player wants to leave, negotiate a good fee and move on. Otherwise players will sign one year rolling contracts and you get nothing.
 
Most recent UEFA changes have been met with disdain, and then worked out for much for better, so I'm intrigued, e.g. The Nations League replacing friendlies, and the expanded Euros to make the qualifying stages much more interesting. The group stages of the CL are pretty dull for the most part nowadays, so I'd welcome a new system.
 
Cloud7 said:
I like this rule about CL teams not being able to sign players from other CL teams. Sure, as one of the established clubs it makes things more difficult for us, but on the flip side, when you have a team like Monaco, or Spurs back in the day, who qualify for the CL, rather than having their players instantly poached by the bigger teams, they get a chance to build on it. For the good of football, I think it's a worthwhile move. It means that United also has to get more creative with scouting, rather than just lobbing money at a club for a Matic, Sancho etc.
Click to expand...
It could also just entrench the top sides in each league. They don't lose their players PLUS they're forced into buying from sides outside of the CL.
 
Not good for us. If it's easier to make champions League its just another excuse to let your standards slip more.

One thing I would change is allow teams from the same country to draw eachother from as early as the group stages.

Same matchups in the CL keep occuring because of this constraint
 
“We could imagine a subscription for the last 15 minutes of a specific game,”

Wow. Has the world come to this? I hate that I can see the logic.

How about a subscription for the last 15 minutes of the footy, the last three balls of "the hundred" in cricket, the tie-break in the fifth set at tennis, the final hole at the golf, and the first lap of F1 races (or even just the first corner). Coming soon to a PPV channel near you!
 
Counterfactual said:
“We could imagine a subscription for the last 15 minutes of a specific game,”

Wow. Has the world come to this? I hate that I can see the logic.

How about a subscription for the last 15 minutes of the footy, the last three balls of "the hundred" in cricket, the tie-break in the fifth set at tennis, the final hole at the golf, and the first lap of F1 races (or even just the first corner). Coming soon to a PPV channel near you!
Click to expand...
His point in the wider context about the short attention span of the average viewer is probably correct though in my opinion. Of course, something like that would never happen in football. It's too pointless. Golf and other sports are different because of the amount of time they take.
 
This is just going to aid the creation of the European Super League long term.

Group stages still can have two pretty dud games like Chelsea or Dortmund groups this year but this will surely just spread the quality even thinner.
 
tomaldinho1 said:
This is just going to aid the creation of the European Super League long term.

Group stages still can have two pretty dud games like Chelsea or Dortmund groups this year but this will surely just spread the quality even thinner.
Click to expand...
Yes - but.

The NFL system has the best teams playing each other more than the worst teams.

If UEFA adopted that - then it would give a chance for the little clubs to qualify and keep the quality high.

So Man Utd might draw Barca in the League stage, but Young Boys might not. That could be potentially an additional 3 points for the weaker sides on average keeping the league close.

If they do the opposite and make the big clubs not play each other I think it will be a disaster
 
https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/56325695

The CL teams not signing each others players is genius. That will cap transfer fees and wages. Messi is worth so much because PSG and City would pay him it if Barca don't. If they can't sign him though, he can't command such high wages

I think that could be really good for the game. It will help make the game profitable, put he brakes on financial doping, etc. Of course there needs to be some mechanism to switch between clubs? Maybe only if in last year of contract?
 
My issue with all these changes being discussed, is that the biggest benefits will be for teams like Madrid and Barcelona. I struggle to see why the English clubs, who play in the best league in the world, are so hell bent on giving these badly run clubs in mickey mouse leagues a leg up?

I worry that in their greed and the promise of a quick or easy buck, the American owners of Liverpool and United are failing to look at the bigger picture. That once they have given up the major advantage they hold over their European counterparts, the advantages of a better climate and more romantic or attractive cities in which to live will still be there for Madrid and Barca, and English sides will fall behind. The cynic in me suggests that the lure of being the also-ran in a ringfenced and financially lucrative set up means they're not failing to see the big picture at all and don't care if we're successful or not, just that we make money for them.
 
Berbaclass said:
His point in the wider context about the short attention span of the average viewer is probably correct though in my opinion. Of course, something like that would never happen in football. It's too pointless. Golf and other sports are different because of the amount of time they take.
Click to expand...

I understand the wider context of limited attention spans, and I agree, I can see the logic. However, I think his statement did apply to football. He specifically mentioned a subscription for the last 15 minutes of a match.

Agnelli also stressed that football must think of ways to attract younger viewers in an increasingly crowded marketplace. “We could imagine a subscription for the last 15 minutes of a specific game,” he said. “The attention span of today’s kids and tomorrow’s spenders is completely different to the one I had when I was their age.
Click to expand...
 
diarm said:
My issue with all these changes being discussed, is that the biggest benefits will be for teams like Madrid and Barcelona. I struggle to see why the English clubs, who play in the best league in the world, are so hell bent on giving these badly run clubs in mickey mouse leagues a leg up?

I worry that in their greed and the promise of a quick or easy buck, the American owners of Liverpool and United are failing to look at the bigger picture. That once they have given up the major advantage they hold over their European counterparts, the advantages of a better climate and more romantic or attractive cities in which to live will still be there for Madrid and Barca, and English sides will fall behind. The cynic in me suggests that the lure of being the also-ran in a ringfenced and financially lucrative set up means they're not failing to see the big picture at all and don't care if we're successful or not, just that we make money for them.
Click to expand...
Sorry I'm lost. What benefit does Barca and Madrid have that Utd don't?
 
ti vu said:
I read somewhere, the top 8 would qualify for next season CL. So there is some motivation to play well in these games until the end.
Click to expand...

That would be horrendous. I'm no fan of the top 4 trophy, but its undeniably something to play for. If you had CL qualification sowed up before Xmas but were out of the title race, the entire second half of the league season would be entirely pointless.
 
rcoobc said:
Sorry I'm lost. What benefit does Barca and Madrid have that Utd don't?
Click to expand...

At the moment, our biggest competitive advantage over our major European counterparts is that we play in the best league in the world. Players from everywhere want to play in the premier competition in club football - the Premier League. Fans from all over the world tune in to watch the most exciting games in the most exciting league.

I get why Bayern, Madrid, Barca, Juve or PSG would want to devalue that and create a stronger, more attractive competition that negates the draw of the Prem. I just don't get why, other than merely financial greed, we would be so quick to get on board with it. From a purely football point of view it makes no sense.

Once this end game has been achieved, where has our competitive edge gone? Once the Premier League is the poorer second cousin to this European Super League, why do fans choose Liverpool or United over Bayern or PSG? Why do talented young players choose to live in rainy, drab England when they can live in sexy, sunny Barcelona?

United and Liverpool are massive clubs, but we're massive clubs because of the League we play in. A League we helped make great yes, but one that has helped make us great too. We don't have the natural advantages in terms of climate, architecture and latin culture that many of our rivals have and never will. They aren't going to hand over those advantages so we shouldn't hand over ours so readily.
 
diarm said:
At the moment, our biggest competitive advantage over our major European counterparts is that we play in the best richest league in the world.
Click to expand...

The big money is indifferent to the particular venue, it only needs a vetted platform to make even more money, directly or indirectly... the Brexit could really harm the PL in that sense, much more than this new European footballing circus imho. I agree the English clubs should withdraw from that, though, and push forward the NBA/NFL system that would be much more appealing to the rest of the world (Asia, Australia, North America).
 
SinNombre said:
I think this is the Swiss system setup which actually will be fun.

Just so that people understand how this will go assuming teams are seeded and using teams from this year's group stage and theoretical points in brackets

R1

Bayern vs Lokomotiv
Barca vs Fevencvaros
Liverpool vs Midtjylland
Chelsea vs Rennes
Dortmund vs Brugge
...
Atletico vs Salzburg
Sevilla vs Krasnodar
Leipzig vs Istanbul

R2

Assuming the seeded teams wins

Bayern (3) vs Sevilla (3)
Barca (3) vs Dortmund (3)
Chelsea (3) vs Atletico (3)
Liverpool (3) vs Leipzig (3)
...
Salzburg (0) vs Rennes (0)

R3

Assuming Bayern, Barca win, and Chelsea/Atletico and Liverpool/Leipzig are draws and Salzburg wins

Bayern (6) vs Barca (6)
Chelsea (4) vs Leipzig (4)
Liverpool (4) vs Atletico (4)
Salzburg (3) vs Sevilla (3)
...
Rennes (0) vs Brugge (0)

and so on.

R10

would be something like
Bayern (22) vs PSG (20)
City (21) vs Barca (19)
Liverpool (19) vs Chelsea (19)
Atletico (18) vs Leipzig (17)
United (16) vs RM (16)
...
Istanbul (9) vs Ajax (11)
Rennes (6) vs Brugge(6)

Essentially in the later rounds, the top teams will continue playing each other and the bottom teams each other (and you need to go on a streak to change things).
Click to expand...

Yes, this might save this boring competition.

Seedless random draw with no rectrictions would work too.
 
largelyworried said:
That would be horrendous. I'm no fan of the top 4 trophy, but its undeniably something to play for. If you had CL qualification sowed up before Xmas but were out of the title race, the entire second half of the league season would be entirely pointless.
Click to expand...

I don't see how they would squeeze 10 CL games before Christmas. With this CL reform. They're pushing to reform leagues format too, and they're not so subtle about it.

There may be some Brexit resistant since PL has been paid well, but for (every) other leagues, teams would jump at this chance to tap into the CL money.
 
ti vu said:
I read somewhere, the top 8 would qualify for next season CL. So there is some motivation to play well in these games

the end.
Click to expand...

largelyworried said:
That would be horrendous. I'm no fan of the top 4 trophy, but its undeniably something to play for. If you had CL qualification sowed up before Xmas but were out of the title race, the entire second half of the league season would be entirely pointless.
Click to expand...

Won't happen so don't worry. They're debating where the new 4 places are going. No League is going to accept losing places
 
ti vu said:
I don't see how they would squeeze 10 CL games before Christmas. With this CL reform. They're pushing to reform leagues format too, and they're not so subtle about it.

There may be some Brexit resistant since PL has been paid well, but for (every) other leagues, teams would jump at this chance to tap into the CL money.
Click to expand...
It's not actually anymore games.

A couple of years ago we had second group stage AND CL qualifying AND more rounds in FA Cup.

Even more recently, we had CL qualifying AND Last 32 Europa. Both now gone.

*CL qualifying gone for top leagues
 
rcoobc said:
https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/56325695

The CL teams not signing each others players is genius. That will cap transfer fees and wages. Messi is worth so much because PSG and City would pay him it if Barca don't. If they can't sign him though, he can't command such high wages

I think that could be really good for the game. It will help make the game profitable, put he brakes on financial doping, etc. Of course there needs to be some mechanism to switch between clubs? Maybe only if in last year of contract?
Click to expand...
This is basically the traditional big clubs who don't have much money right now: Real Madrid, Barca & co sticking it up to City & PSG.
 
rcoobc said:
Won't happen so don't worry. They're debating where the new 4 places are going. No League is going to accept losing places
Click to expand...
You must have misunderstood my point.

They're doing nothing about 4 guaranteed CL place for top leagues. The league reform is about getting less teams in the leagues AKA Bundesliga like. Wrapping League Cup. French FA looked like they're ITK and had already done that, as we're hearing UEFA is considering giving French league 4 CL places!

rcoobc said:
It's not actually anymore games.

A couple of years ago we had second group stage AND CL qualifying AND more rounds in FA Cup.

Even more recently, we had CL qualifying AND Last 32 Europa. Both now gone.

*CL qualifying gone for top leagues
Click to expand...

It's clearly UEFA is bowing down to big clubs demand which in this case is right thing. If you have to play many games, then it's better between quality teams, and quality teams are more guaranteed to participate this way.

4 extra more games ain't looked much more, but the prize (CL top 8) demands teams to stay serious. Every other leagues would readily adapt to let their CL teams to make the most of it. If PL resists, then its CL teams would suffer. Us and Liverpool did threaten via proposal that we want to reform the league, didn't we? Sound to me like ITKs, had been briefed about this plan for a while. Everyone have been doing their part to complete the puzzle.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.