I’m still waiting for answer why Barcelona or Real Madrid would be in Super League before Girona? If we are talking about sport merits.
Do Real Madrid or Barcelona fans accept Girona getting in before those two clubs?
Is the European super league back? | United Statement: We remain committed to UEFA
- Thread starter kouroux
- Start date
Do Real Madrid or Barcelona fans accept Girona getting in before those two clubs?
because they have won 17 of the last 20 ligas and 20 European Cups between both.
The current champions is already here to reward immediacy. 6 games, eliminated and remember the experience.
The super league is supposed to include Girona in a lower division from which it could grow.
Another idea (assuming they win la liga) is a knockout tournament, all against all, one team per country, since if we want to be fair it is not logical to reward the fourth from Italy/Spain/etc while the Latvian champion has to play previous rounds. Latvian fans also deserve to experience magical nights in Europe.
The only certainty is change.
It’s common sense, isn’t it? Everyone knows the political situation in the UK and that it’s more or less impossible for any English side to join in at this moment, any involvement is going to be years and years ahead and they don’t even know if the ESL is going to be a reality or not. At this point there’s no upside whatsoever to stating they’re open to the idea. Meanwhile, if the ESL does become a thing and it ends up involving big clubs, increased revenue, it’s obviously going to be interesting for the big clubs in England. Clubs were keen to join in before the shitstorm, not without reason.
So talk about merits are nonsens unless we look at history. Looking forward to Super League inviting teams like Sunderland and Everton for their success far back.
We know what this is about. Whole project is about saving Barcelona and RealMadrid from their economic problems. Just look who are founder of project and if there is connection with those clubs.
First of all, I am against the Super League for several reasons, and the main one is that there is no sporting merit.
Secondly, you say that there is no criticism from Barcelona fans of their club officials. Wrong , but a lot.
You'd have to live in Catalonia and you'd change your mind.
I remind you that Laporta was dismissed with a vote of no confidence, a year before the end of his presidential term. Having signed Guardiola, he won a treble, a sextet, the starting eleven full of academy players and for many the best team in history. And yet he was kicked out. Isn't that criticism?
In Catalonia right now mainly, and in part of Spain, many want Laporta out of the club, after his very good management with the debt, the ffp and the management of the new stadium.
By the way, in the last match the fans whistled at the players in the first half because of their discontent with the football they saw. After winning a league, against the odds, with no money and bringing up academy players.
How many times have United fans whistled at their players in these 11 shitty years? Are they critical of the club and the players?
Football as we know it which means ~10 superclubs with all the money and power and the rest fighting for the scraps. Superleague in theory should expand that to 16, which is good for Ajax or Benfica or Milan but worse than ever for Aston Villa, Sevilla, Roma, etc...
Re: players: they deserve to be paid what the market say they are worth. By all means impose financial regulations to save clubs from themselves, but not at the expence of the players
Bernd Reichart, CEO of Super League: “One of the clubs that just made a statement against the Super League, called me and said ‘we're saying no in public, but we're with you’.”
Really curious how this develops. Did any of the founding clubs actually withdraw? Like officially? I know the PL teams said so in a statement but iirc there were clausules in place that if they officially withdrew they would be fined and of course that would lead to all sorts of cases in court.
Really curious how this develops. Did any of the founding clubs actually withdraw? Like officially? I know the PL teams said so in a statement but iirc there were clausules in place that if they officially withdrew they would be fined and of course that would lead to all sorts of cases in court.
What, super league will fine the clubs?Bernd Reichart, CEO of Super League: “One of the clubs that just made a statement against the Super League, called me and said ‘we're saying no in public, but we're with you’.”
Really curious how this develops. Did any of the founding clubs actually withdraw? Like officially? I know the PL teams said so in a statement but iirc there were clausules in place that if they officially withdrew they would be fined and of course that would lead to all sorts of cases in court.
And if you can't believe Bernd Reichart who can you believe?
It is equally likely that it is true or that it isn't but the guy knows he can throw it out there because everyone will believe it to be true.Bernd Reichart, CEO of Super League: “One of the clubs that just made a statement against the Super League, called me and said ‘we're saying no in public, but we're with you’.”
We are the supermeme of football.
I recall reports going around at the time, and might be mistaken on this, that the founding clubs couldn’t easily pull out. As a safety net. Which given the circumstances and people involved…would make sense. But could be BS. And there would indeed be a fine. How legal all of that is…no idea.
It is a corporate world and I’d believe in a heartbeat clubs would claim one thing publically whilst having these conversations in private. Another thing to take the word of the CEO who would have a vested interest of course.
A club like Bayern I can imagine staying out of this, not even so much out of principle but because they have a good thing going. But owners like Glazers/Boehly?
Perez said after the failure, the clubs had signed contracts you can't just walk away from, and it will be back in future.
I would love Perez to get his league without the English clubs, it will be a car crash all on his head
I would imagine there's a lot of truth in what he says. I'm sure the English clubs are paying lip service to being opposed to this while actually viewing it as necessary for their financial security.Bernd Reichart, CEO of Super League: “One of the clubs that just made a statement against the Super League, called me and said ‘we're saying no in public, but we're with you’.”
Really curious how this develops. Did any of the founding clubs actually withdraw? Like officially? I know the PL teams said so in a statement but iirc there were clausules in place that if they officially withdrew they would be fined and of course that would lead to all sorts of cases in court.
Prolly, with no English clubs this won’t work at all. Guessing it is also a calculated move to have all of this on Perez. When it goes south, he’ll take the fall, club gets rid of him and gets off (lightly).
I find the hypocrisy a tad amusing. Football is fecked and it needs a hard reset. I’m hardly a fan of the ESL concept, but the current direction of UEFA, FIFA and the Premier League has made me lose most of my interest in football anyway. They are rather large parts of the problem
UEFA and FIFA. The latter, after years of trying, has finally managed to put together a revamped club world cup which will mean more matches, more revenue for FIFA. Both of them try to come up with more national team matches, meaningless tournaments, to increase revenues for their own benefits. FIFA just fecked most top leagues in the world by moving the world cup from summer to winter. FIFA will continue to push for a larger club world cup, as a future rival to the CL.
Meanwhile, in our glorious premier league, we have allowed the introduction of state funded clubs, oligarch ownership, to completely feck over the competition, to the point where even the UK government got involved to increase the chances of the Saudi ownership of Newcastle being approved because of fears it would have a negative impact on the UK’s relations with SA. We already know there’s political concerns, on the highest level, that the charges against Manchester City can have a negative effect on UK’s relations…All for the greater good of smaller clubs, and matchgoing fans obviously, integrity of the league and all that. As for the charges against Manchester City, the Premier League is a product and the overall value of the product is all that matters, the outcome is already written and there isn’t going to be any harsh punishments.
UEFA and FIFA. The latter, after years of trying, has finally managed to put together a revamped club world cup which will mean more matches, more revenue for FIFA. Both of them try to come up with more national team matches, meaningless tournaments, to increase revenues for their own benefits. FIFA just fecked most top leagues in the world by moving the world cup from summer to winter. FIFA will continue to push for a larger club world cup, as a future rival to the CL.
Meanwhile, in our glorious premier league, we have allowed the introduction of state funded clubs, oligarch ownership, to completely feck over the competition, to the point where even the UK government got involved to increase the chances of the Saudi ownership of Newcastle being approved because of fears it would have a negative impact on the UK’s relations with SA. We already know there’s political concerns, on the highest level, that the charges against Manchester City can have a negative effect on UK’s relations…All for the greater good of smaller clubs, and matchgoing fans obviously, integrity of the league and all that. As for the charges against Manchester City, the Premier League is a product and the overall value of the product is all that matters, the outcome is already written and there isn’t going to be any harsh punishments.
If Everton or Sunderland achieve good results over several years they would surely be in the conversation.
I have not talked about successes from fifty years ago, I have told you that they have won the last 17 of 20 ligas.
A mix of social mass, history and current successes would seem good to me.
The issue is that the same ones always win but in this case you are using the exception ( Girona) to justify the current model.
If I read correctly, in the Champions League in the last ten years, only Benfica, Porto and Ajax reached quarters, the rest of the places have always been for teams from the five major leagues.
The differences between teams are already enormous, it is already a competition for the rich.
People are upset because City have committed irregularities, because Saudi football does whatever it wants, and when there is a control project it is thrown overboard because it is supposedly exclusively to save Madrid.
They will have to put someone related to a fashion team (Leverkusen?) as CEO to see if they gain more followers.
And now is when comes the "la liga has not been managed well", "the premier is very rich", changing the democracy of European football for the unfounded fear that the leagues will die.
The fear of a semi-closed competition when clubs let themselves go, considering being fourth a success, year after year.
Real Madrid's finances are fine.
What can he even do about it?
Someone mentioned, and I don’t know if this is true, that the UK Government is planning on having some law in place that would basically prohibit the ESL. And unlike in the EU, once passed to law it would not be possible to challenge it in court. Anyone know more about the legality of this?
When a politician wants something badly they usually find a way, I imagine they'd find a creative way to make it not financially worth it via the tax system
He seems a bit of a mouthy knobBernd Reichart, CEO of Super League: “One of the clubs that just made a statement against the Super League, called me and said ‘we're saying no in public, but we're with you’.”
Really curious how this develops. Did any of the founding clubs actually withdraw? Like officially? I know the PL teams said so in a statement but iirc there were clausules in place that if they officially withdrew they would be fined and of course that would lead to all sorts of cases in court.
Well the money obviously exists, it just lines the pockets of executives at the likes of UEFA or in football team boardrooms. The money people will only ever spend what’s absolutely necessary on the actual football side of things to keep the money and sponsorships rolling in.
FIFA have about $4b just sitting in the bank in cash reserves. They’re a non profit organisation…
Surely that money should go to the people that actually make the sport what it is? Not the people that break laws in random countries and force them to host tournaments?
Look at American sports also, baseball and basketball players are earning more than football players and those sports aren’t as popular as football.
Will teams really go bust? FFP has kind of put a stop from teams over spending unless they’re supported by a state. What’s reality? These guys are millionaires by the time they’re 20, how do you bring them back to something they’ve never known?
Football changed years ago, and it’s better than it’s ever been (maybe with the exception of VAR) but there’s absolutely more money and value to be extracted, otherwise you wouldn’t get people like Bohley buying Chelsea and spending a billion £ for fun. They all know something else bigger is on the horizon.
Ajax did reach semis though. Plus, Girona IS a team from the five major leagues. As are AS Monaco, Olympique Lyon, AS Rome, Villarreal and RB Leipzig, who did reach semis and final of the UCL in the last ten years. Would you favour Villarreal over Girona to be in the Star League in this case?
So those would be Pérez, Laporta/Bartomeu and Agnelli?
BTW, who has been forced to host a tournament?Countries happily apply.
,
In the US they are more popular, you can't compare the US sports to anywhere else, it's essentially a closed shop, full of regulations that would never work anywhere else
This is utterly mental.
It's not, really. Maybe it's more difficult to understand that line of thinking in England where there has never been a handful of clubs perpetually dominating the football scene. But England is an anomaly in this. In most countries, you get 2-3 clubs being the top dogs with no risk of losing their status. For example, i follow the the third biggest club in my country (much, much smaller league) and when they win the title, the fans of the two big clubs make the joke that "these titles don't really count". And, of course, their owners make sure only individual TV deals and sponsorships are possible. They even consider it a travesty when a call goes against their teams (or they don't get a soft one when they need it). This attitude trickles down to the fanbases. Not just the Ultras, the majority of fans. I am not surprised at all that the likes of Juventus and Real Madrid think that they're "owed" their status. It is what it is.
Hardly.
And just because the TV revenue is divided in a better way in England, it’s not as if anyone gives a shit about smaller clubs. Since the arrival of Roman into the league, 12 out of 19 league titles have gone to Chelsea and Manchester City. Polititians happy to weigh in to make sure Saudi’s could take over Newcastle, and then they’re «worried about the fans» in relation to a potential european super league. It’s fairly funny.
I think it's just standard tribalism. Align with the ones who are like you. Or maybe full individualism. We see this in politics all the time with people supporting a position for selfish reasons while falling to see the big picture.
Anyway, it's kind of refreshing and somehow better than "this is a great opportunity for small clubs that, now that they won't be able to compete against the big teams (DISCLAIMER: unless they get extraordinary results for several years in a row while avoid collapsing and/or getting dismantled by big teams), surely will get access to more money from private investors to help them grow".
everyone right now is just scared of pr shitstorm.
And before that they were threatened by UEFA and national Govs
Also let me say that this UK law about not allowing teams to join any tournament that isn't ruled by UEFA is kind of ridiculous.
so they're saying "if you join another international tournament that isn't CL,UL or Conference you'll be excluded from Premier League" right?
Well this looks like a big bluff.
What's gonna happen to PL if suddenly United,City,Liverpool,Arsenal,Chelsea and Tottenham are outed?
Tv rights gonna bust immediatly as those 6 attract like 85% worth of Tv deals
I don't really understand what's UK gov is afraid of.
I mean in the end this SL (which is trasforming into a big bullshit honestly giving how much they're bending to please everyone) would be another name for Champions League, Europa League and Conference League.
Difference? teams from smaller and less relevant clubs are unlikely to be part of it unlike now where teams from Kazakistand and so on get a piece of it
You'd think of all the football clubs to have an attachment to the European Cup it'd be Real Madrid? A truly spoilt, pathetic fanbase
you know what?
I'm afraid that after this PR shit storm on Super League
Next step gonna be Arabas pulling their money muscles and literally make the same thing adding 2-3 arabs team and throwing so much money to convince EU teams to join them.
While SL could follow marketing projects and be realistic about earnings and what's not .... Arabs saying "Oh I want this" like they did for world cups and so on
Well they could literally say "OH if you join this new Champions League we're gonna give you 12B/year to divide between those 20 teams"
Those money are nothing for them anyway
And I'm afraid that now that "football is free" after this sentence arabs will jump on it.
But that's precisely the problem, lack of care for teams from Kazakhstan. They wouldn't have been as weak if they were given equal opportunities by UEFA since 90s.
What you will achieve long term is absolute disinterest in your elite clubs in most of Europe and with that, you will start losing appeal and money. I don't watch Champions League anymore, it is borefest, and to me there is equal importance in matches between Copenhagen and Galatasaray on one side, and Milan and Dortmund on the other side. It is all tasteless and boring, I prefer watching league football. If Copenhagen and Galatasaray actually stood chance of making something, than I'd be glad to watch. This way, it's a bloody charade that I prefer not to be a part of.
Super league isn't going to make me consumer, because competitive spirit has long been lost.
I don’t see the point in pretending. Happily sacrifice the dreams and hopes of other clubs for more success of my own club. Don’t see that as strange view.
Technically this would be just another European Cup. Just some different flags and names around it.
In a poll on Redcafe 63% backed Qatari ownership of your club because you thought it was the best way to compete in the PL. Please spare me the lectures on football morality.
Last edited:
Well I do not know, really. I guess the first thing I would ask myself if I were a member is if City can have multiple teams in the league, if they can have one but they don't participate and if they are going to dope it.
Villarreal already paid Riquelme 20 years ago, it is a rich club. If they were to participate, they would invest to obtain points, positions or whatever the scale was.
In any case, for me, the interesting thing about these lower divisions is to relaunch Polish, Romanian, Turkish, Czech, Belgian, Swedish teams, etc., that the presence of that competition provokes investment, or that a certain Hungarian/Greek player considers that the showcase of this competition allows him to stay in his country for more years. And that Olympique or Roma, who you name, go to another level, which at the moment does not allow them to win leagues.
It may happen that only clubs in big cities are profitable, that there are monopolies in minor leagues and that certain clubs suffer a lot as you said in a post later, but even with all that I find it interesting
no mate.
You know what killed football?
The Sheikh Al-Berluscon getting Milan in 1986 and doing what PSG and City doing in the past years.
Inflating the market.
That was the start. Everyone started to spend much more and get debt to keep up with Berlusconi offers.
So all those smaller countries that didn't have super rich owners were busted.
Meaning teams like Red Star and so on lost any chance to compete against teams that had owners who willingly spent on a player what a past elite team like Red Star could on for their 14-20players.
Then the other thing that literally killed competitive football unless you had super rich owners was Bossman.
Thanks to that everything inflated to no end.
This killed competitive football and not UEFA not giving chances...
Nevermind the debate on the SL, I find the Brexit backing UK government ignoring the ECJ in order to keep english clubs from leaving a european competition (while european clubs are able to do so) absolutely hilarious.
Can the 37% not lecture?
I appreciate the lack of pretense - some of the comments here were starting by to do my head in. I don’t mind reading opinions that are grounded in self-interest, as long as they’re transparent.
And while there are very clear benefits for the big clubs in the short term, I think the ESL would shed interest eventually as it seems to me like the worst of both worlds. The closed nature of US sports without a draft system to balance it out. The league system of European sports without the local rivalries built organically over time.
Once the novelty wears off, I can imagine it being pretty boring.