European Super League (Indefinitely Suspended)

[Mamba81p]

You are so wrong, and you have absolutely no idea how wrong you are.

The last time a mid market team won the CL (or was even in the finals) was Porto in 2004. I don't think I'm wrong at all. The current system is not set up to give small market teams a chance, unless your idea of having a chance is fighting over bread crumbs in a system designed to keep you under a boot.

I totally agree with you. The Champions League hasn't been a "fair" competition since they changed the format in '92 and allowed non-champions from the biggest leagues to play. It is what it is, we live in a capitalist world and money talks. But this is pushing it overboard.

Competitiveness isn't just about who will be the European champion. One of the main perks of being a national champion is that you will have an opportunity to compete on the biggest stage against the biggest clubs and best players. There are millions of fans across Europe who dream of their local team just playing in the CL against the greats, and this league would deny them that. We will probably never have another Porto winning it all, but denying them an opportunity to even try and compete is disgusting.

Here is a moment that will forever be in my memory: a small, once great team, gets an opportunity to play against one of the biggest clubs in the world, and beats them.

Watch on YouTube

I've always listened to my father's stories of the good old days, when our club would regularly play(and win) against Real, Arsenal, Inter, and other European elite, and fortunately I got to experience that. Do you know how much that means to the fans, to the young players that got to test themselves against the best?

My son won't have those memories if a league like this is formed, which is sad. And I'm not even mentioning the financial consequences for everyone except the chosen few.

I am not that familiar with the history of Red Star Belgrade but there was another team from Eastern Europe who won 1 European Cup and played in another final: Steaua Bucharest. Do you know how that team was formed? Because of the Communist Party: match fixing and stealing players from other clubs. It was a joke. I am not sure if it's the same situation with Red Star Belgrade, but there are a lot of common points between them(including 1 player)

[HIF]

If UEFA really wanted to give those teams a chance, they'd limit how much money the big market clubs can spend, they'd have a regulated farm system that prevents top teams from poaching talent from smaller teams, etc. Instead, we have a playground for the rich right now, where ~15 teams monopolise all the talent in the world and the rest of the teams fight over table scraps.

UEFA are giving them a chance. Limit the big teams from spending money? So the can flee and create a 'super-league' - like they are doing? The owners are greedy - and it wont end well.

A chance doesn't mean just being allowed to participate. It means actually being able to compete.

Do you not see the irony of your comments?

[Raps in 4]

You are so wrong, and you have absolutely no idea how wrong you are.

The last time a mid market team won the CL (or was even in the finals) was Porto in 2004. I don't think I'm wrong at all. The current system is not set up to give small market teams a chance, unless your idea of having a chance is fighting over bread crumbs in a system designed to keep you under a boot.

I totally agree with you. The Champions League hasn't been a "fair" competition since they changed the format in '92 and allowed non-champions from the biggest leagues to play. It is what it is, we live in a capitalist world and money talks. But this is pushing it overboard.

Competitiveness isn't just about who will be the European champion. One of the main perks of being a national champion is that you will have an opportunity to compete on the biggest stage against the biggest clubs and best players. There are millions of fans across Europe who dream of their local team just playing in the CL against the greats, and this league would deny them that. We will probably never have another Porto winning it all, but denying them an opportunity to even try and compete is disgusting.

Here is a moment that will forever be in my memory: a small, once great team, gets an opportunity to play against one of the biggest clubs in the world, and beats them.

Watch on YouTube

I've always listened to my father's stories of the good old days, when our club would regularly play(and win) against Real, Arsenal, Inter, and other European elite, and fortunately I got to experience that. Do you know how much that means to the fans, to the young players that got to test themselves against the best?

My son won't have those memories if a league like this is formed, which is sad. And I'm not even mentioning the financial consequences for everyone except the chosen few.

My "home" team is supposed to be Cukaricki, if I go by where I lived. But I never saw the point in cheering for anyone other than Zvezda/Partizan because nobody else really had a chance at winning the league (those two clubs have won 43 of 57 seasons). Even though Cukaricki has been half decent lately, they're still not at the top, and likely never will be. It's that inequality in European football that sucks the interest out of it for me. The idea that a club with more resources is better just because it has more resources goes against the spirit of competition.

I can see why losing the magic of seeing an underdog beat a behemoth could be seen as a negative for some, but for me, I just want to watch fair, competitive football, even if my city doesn't have a team in this new league.

[HIF]

Just because something has been done a certain way for ages doesn't mean it's the right way.

Maybe the NBA should implement 2nd and 3rd divisions with promotions and relegations.

NBA as an organization is incredibly prone to changes and constantly develops new ideas. The complete opposite of UEFA. Maybe it has something to do with the team owners being on the board of governors - sort of like the Super League now.

The NBA is a small elite monopoly. Who made sure to kill any competitors.

[queridiculo]

Just because something has been done a certain way for ages doesn't mean it's the right way.

Maybe the NBA should implement 2nd and 3rd divisions with promotions and relegations.

NBA as an organization is incredibly prone to changes and constantly develops new ideas. The complete opposite of UEFA. Maybe it has something to do with the team owners being on the board of governors - sort of like the Super League now.

The NBA represents the interests of 30 franchises whereas UEFA represents 37 member associations with each of them organizing football for their respective nations.

We are talking about a governing body whose intent it is to represent the interests of in excess of 1000 professional football clubs divided over 59 divisions, and each association member represents and organizes thousands of domestic clubs on their own.

There are 26000 football clubs in Germany alone and each of them benefits by the structure put in place by the professional clubs and UEFA.

We're talking about a scale here that's so massive that it's laughable to draw comparisons to US professional sports league and to chastise UEFA for being slow to adopt changes.

Without this structure there would be no Manchester United, nobody around the world would give a flying **** about Anfield, or any of the plastic clubs in Premier League that now have the audacity to act as if they're a step above.

Chelsea and Manchester City for **** sake, those clubs wouldn't even be around if it wasn't for revenue sharing with the lower divisions that's been the lifeline for a lot of lower tier clubs for decades upon decades.

This split has nothing to do with UEFA failure to innovate, it's a cash grab by greedy know nothings that think that their inherited wealth entitles them to play by a different set of rules.

Disgusting and shameful, I hope they all burn in hell.

[HIF]

A chance doesn't mean just being allowed to participate. It means actually being able to compete.

You are so wrong, and you have absolutely no idea how wrong you are.

The last time a mid market team won the CL (or was even in the finals) was Porto in 2004. I don't think I'm wrong at all. The current system is not set up to give small market teams a chance, unless your idea of having a chance is fighting over bread crumbs in a system designed to keep you under a boot.

Now you've changed your argument to it being inequitable for small market teams even though as you say Porto won the CL, Leicester won the EPL etc... Having 14 greedy owners forming their own league doesn't help the other 1000's of teams, it doesn't even give them a possibility.

[aggerrard]

Other teams won't replace them in the new EPL. People only care about the top teams right now because they're rich enough to sign the top players. If the top players are all in the ESL, that's what everyone will be watching. No owner is going to spend money on an EPL team.



There is very little structure in the current system, hence why this current mess even exists. Something like this would never happen in an American sports league because they are actually tightly run ships with strict competitive rules.

You REALLY don't understand Europeans.

Everyone won't watch and the "big" teams will be replaced. I guess you've never heard of Newcastle and Sunderland crowds for example.

The league has fantastic structure. In England the structure includes thousands of clubs and grass roots training, not the 20 or so that American structures can manage.

Then why the outrage? If nobody is going to watch it, they will go bankrupt, and the CL will go forward without them.
Sunderland are in the 3rd league, and one of the reasons is because they are in poor, blue collar area. Economics rule. You cannot have a sustainable club in a poor area without financial backing from a billionaire.

You don't think it will damage the national leagues and smaller teams greatly, even if it isn't a financial success? No one should be happy about this, if they knew what was at stake.

[HIF]

When was the last time one of the big market teams got relegated? When was the last time a small market team won the CL?

The current system is a monopoly and has been for decades. Fans have just covered their eyes and pretended that wasn't the case.

No IDEA. You confuse the CL with domestic leagues.

Football has become THE world sport (yeah sorry Americans) because of it's tradition, equality and structure.

or because it's simple and easy to understand.

So is petanque (and baseball and basketball and Ice Hockey).

[HIF]

Other teams won't replace them in the new EPL. People only care about the top teams right now because they're rich enough to sign the top players. If the top players are all in the ESL, that's what everyone will be watching. No owner is going to spend money on an EPL team.



There is very little structure in the current system, hence why this current mess even exists. Something like this would never happen in an American sports league because they are actually tightly run ships with strict competitive rules.

You REALLY don't understand Europeans.

Everyone won't watch and the "big" teams will be replaced. I guess you've never heard of Newcastle and Sunderland crowds for example.

The league has fantastic structure. In England the structure includes thousands of clubs and grass roots training, not the 20 or so that American structures can manage.

Then why the outrage? If nobody is going to watch it, they will go bankrupt, and the CL will go forward without them.
Sunderland are in the 3rd league, and one of the reasons is because they are in poor, blue collar area. Economics rule. You cannot have a sustainable club in a poor area without financial backing from a billionaire.

If you understood, you'd understand. you don't. You are fixated on the few at the top of a very large pyramid.

[Raps in 4]

You are so wrong, and you have absolutely no idea how wrong you are.

The last time a mid market team won the CL (or was even in the finals) was Porto in 2004. I don't think I'm wrong at all. The current system is not set up to give small market teams a chance, unless your idea of having a chance is fighting over bread crumbs in a system designed to keep you under a boot.

Now you've changed your argument to it being inequitable for small market teams even though as you say Porto won the CL, Leicester won the EPL etc... Having 14 greedy owners forming their own league doesn't help the other 1000's of teams, it doesn't even give them a possibility.

1 mid market CL winner in 16 years or 1 small market league winner in 20 years is nothing to be proud of. The rarity of these outcomes speaks volumes about the states of these competitions.

[Mamba81p]

You REALLY don't understand Europeans.

Everyone won't watch and the "big" teams will be replaced. I guess you've never heard of Newcastle and Sunderland crowds for example.

The league has fantastic structure. In England the structure includes thousands of clubs and grass roots training, not the 20 or so that American structures can manage.

Then why the outrage? If nobody is going to watch it, they will go bankrupt, and the CL will go forward without them.
Sunderland are in the 3rd league, and one of the reasons is because they are in poor, blue collar area. Economics rule. You cannot have a sustainable club in a poor area without financial backing from a billionaire.

You don't think it will damage the national leagues and smaller teams greatly, even if it isn't a financial success? No one should be happy about this, if they knew what was at stake.

It could create more parity among the teams. that would be one benefit, and the "purists" of the game would welcome that. eliminate those 6 teams from PL and see how the standings would look like: very balanced. There will be less money in the beginning since the casual fans watch the games mostly for the brand/big names, but over time that will change(Manchester City was not a big club 15 years ago).
And also I thought people care more about the integrity of the game, and giving the clubs back to the poor etc. Well... that can be solved too.

[Mamba81p]

You REALLY don't understand Europeans.

Everyone won't watch and the "big" teams will be replaced. I guess you've never heard of Newcastle and Sunderland crowds for example.

The league has fantastic structure. In England the structure includes thousands of clubs and grass roots training, not the 20 or so that American structures can manage.

Then why the outrage? If nobody is going to watch it, they will go bankrupt, and the CL will go forward without them.
Sunderland are in the 3rd league, and one of the reasons is because they are in poor, blue collar area. Economics rule. You cannot have a sustainable club in a poor area without financial backing from a billionaire.

If you understood, you'd understand. you don't. You are fixated on the few at the top of a very large pyramid.

That's your argument? really? You don't seem to bring any points to the table other than "you don't understand".

[Inspektor1312]

The last time a mid market team won the CL (or was even in the finals) was Porto in 2004. I don't think I'm wrong at all. The current system is not set up to give small market teams a chance, unless your idea of having a chance is fighting over bread crumbs in a system designed to keep you under a boot.

I totally agree with you. The Champions League hasn't been a "fair" competition since they changed the format in '92 and allowed non-champions from the biggest leagues to play. It is what it is, we live in a capitalist world and money talks. But this is pushing it overboard.

Competitiveness isn't just about who will be the European champion. One of the main perks of being a national champion is that you will have an opportunity to compete on the biggest stage against the biggest clubs and best players. There are millions of fans across Europe who dream of their local team just playing in the CL against the greats, and this league would deny them that. We will probably never have another Porto winning it all, but denying them an opportunity to even try and compete is disgusting.

Here is a moment that will forever be in my memory: a small, once great team, gets an opportunity to play against one of the biggest clubs in the world, and beats them.

Watch on YouTube

I've always listened to my father's stories of the good old days, when our club would regularly play(and win) against Real, Arsenal, Inter, and other European elite, and fortunately I got to experience that. Do you know how much that means to the fans, to the young players that got to test themselves against the best?

My son won't have those memories if a league like this is formed, which is sad. And I'm not even mentioning the financial consequences for everyone except the chosen few.

My "home" team is supposed to be Cukaricki, if I go by where I lived. But I never saw the point in cheering for anyone other than Zvezda/Partizan because nobody else really had a chance at winning the league (those two clubs have won 43 of 57 seasons). Even though Cukaricki has been half decent lately, they're still not at the top, and likely never will be. It's that inequality in European football that sucks the interest out of it for me. The idea that a club with more resources is better just because it has more resources goes against the spirit of competition.

I can see why losing the magic of seeing an underdog beat a behemoth could be seen as a negative for some, but for me, I just want to watch fair, competitive football, even if my city doesn't have a team in this new league.

I totally understand that, because I also support my local team(Napredak), but that's not a problem specific to football- it's specific to corrupt countries like Serbia, and even with that in mind I enjoyed watching them battle in the second division, win a promotion and play against the "big dogs". The matches against one of the "big 2" were highlights of the year to most teenagers interested in football.

Bayern Munich maybe won x titles in a row, but there's great football and competitions even in their third division.

Btw here's a very telling interview from Klopp about this whole situation:

[Raps in 4]

Then why the outrage? If nobody is going to watch it, they will go bankrupt, and the CL will go forward without them.
Sunderland are in the 3rd league, and one of the reasons is because they are in poor, blue collar area. Economics rule. You cannot have a sustainable club in a poor area without financial backing from a billionaire.

You don't think it will damage the national leagues and smaller teams greatly, even if it isn't a financial success? No one should be happy about this, if they knew what was at stake.

It could create more parity among the teams. that would be one benefit, and the "purists" of the game would welcome that. eliminate those 6 teams from PL and see how the standings would look like: very balanced. There will be less money in the beginning since the casual fans watch the games mostly for the brand/big names, but over time that will change(Manchester City was not a big club 15 years ago).
And also I thought people care more about the integrity of the game, and giving the clubs back to the poor etc. Well... that can be solved too.

Manchester City became a big club because Sheikh Mansour decided to go on a spending spree, not because the EPL offers a pathway to success for small market teams.

One way to preserve the smaller leagues in the presence of a super league would be to turn them into minor leagues used for development (the same way it is done in the US). That is what these clubs are right now anyway. This way, local fans would still have something to cheer for, while the primary league would actually be competitive.

[Mamba81p]

No IDEA. You confuse the CL with domestic leagues.

Football has become THE world sport (yeah sorry Americans) because of it's tradition, equality and structure.

or because it's simple and easy to understand.

So is petanque (and baseball and basketball and Ice Hockey).

lol. read the baseball rules, and compare them to soccer.
Ice Hockey really? How the hell can a kid in Brazil ever play hockey?
Basketball has a lot more rules than soccer as well, and is not as simple to play it as soccer. You need a hard court, a ball that can actually bounce, a backboard and a rim. Soccer can be played with 2 rocks, and ball that barely bounces(if at all)

[HIF]

Then why the outrage? If nobody is going to watch it, they will go bankrupt, and the CL will go forward without them.
Sunderland are in the 3rd league, and one of the reasons is because they are in poor, blue collar area. Economics rule. You cannot have a sustainable club in a poor area without financial backing from a billionaire.

If you understood, you'd understand. you don't. You are fixated on the few at the top of a very large pyramid.

That's your argument? really? You don't seem to bring any points to the table other than "you don't understand".

You can't show a blind man what he's not seeing. I just understand that your cultural upbringing means you can't understand a European football problem.

[HIF]

You don't think it will damage the national leagues and smaller teams greatly, even if it isn't a financial success? No one should be happy about this, if they knew what was at stake.

It could create more parity among the teams. that would be one benefit, and the "purists" of the game would welcome that. eliminate those 6 teams from PL and see how the standings would look like: very balanced. There will be less money in the beginning since the casual fans watch the games mostly for the brand/big names, but over time that will change(Manchester City was not a big club 15 years ago).
And also I thought people care more about the integrity of the game, and giving the clubs back to the poor etc. Well... that can be solved too.

Manchester City became a big club because Sheikh Mansour decided to go on a spending spree, not because the EPL offers a pathway to success for small market teams.

One way to preserve the smaller leagues in the presence of a super league would be to turn them into minor leagues used for development (the same way it is done in the US). That is what these clubs are right now anyway. This way, local fans would still have something to cheer for, while the primary league would actually be competitive.

You are also hung up on a "history" that is only a few years old.

I hope your teams go and you enjoy watching your Americanised soccer league. I'll watch my European English league and life can go on.

[Foye]

You are so wrong, and you have absolutely no idea how wrong you are.

The last time a mid market team won the CL (or was even in the finals) was Porto in 2004. I don't think I'm wrong at all. The current system is not set up to give small market teams a chance, unless your idea of having a chance is fighting over bread crumbs in a system designed to keep you under a boot.

I totally agree with you. The Champions League hasn't been a "fair" competition since they changed the format in '92 and allowed non-champions from the biggest leagues to play. It is what it is, we live in a capitalist world and money talks. But this is pushing it overboard.

Competitiveness isn't just about who will be the European champion. One of the main perks of being a national champion is that you will have an opportunity to compete on the biggest stage against the biggest clubs and best players. There are millions of fans across Europe who dream of their local team just playing in the CL against the greats, and this league would deny them that. We will probably never have another Porto winning it all, but denying them an opportunity to even try and compete is disgusting.

Here is a moment that will forever be in my memory: a small, once great team, gets an opportunity to play against one of the biggest clubs in the world, and beats them.

Watch on YouTube

I've always listened to my father's stories of the good old days, when our club would regularly play(and win) against Real, Arsenal, Inter, and other European elite, and fortunately I got to experience that. Do you know how much that means to the fans, to the young players that got to test themselves against the best?

My son won't have those memories if a league like this is formed, which is sad. And I'm not even mentioning the financial consequences for everyone except the chosen few.

Marko Marin the legend hahaha.

Played against him in my youth days when he was still playing for SG Hoechst at like 6 y/o lmao.

[HIF]

or because it's simple and easy to understand.

So is petanque (and baseball and basketball and Ice Hockey).

lol. read the baseball rules, and compare them to soccer.
Ice Hockey really? How the hell can a kid in Brazil ever play hockey?
Basketball has a lot more rules than soccer as well, and is not as simple to play it as soccer. You need a hard court, a ball that can actually bounce, a backboard and a rim. Soccer can be played with 2 rocks, and ball that barely bounces(if at all)

I played, umpired and coached baseball. it's really a very simple game (based on the English game of rounders) just incredibly drawn out.

At least you understand the beauty and equality of football. You need nothing to play it. Greedy people need lotsa money though.

[queridiculo]

Manchester City became a big club because Sheikh Mansour decided to go on a spending spree, not because the EPL offers a pathway to success for small market teams.

One way to preserve the smaller leagues in the presence of a super league would be to turn them into minor leagues used for development (the same way it is done in the US). That is what these clubs are right now anyway. This way, local fans would still have something to cheer for, while the primary league would actually be competitive.

Manchester City is a club with over 100 years of history that included titles, hardship via relegation, and promotion back to the top tier in 2001 well before the club was purchased in 2008.

City is a success story of the football structure sold short by being turned into a billionaires play thing, that's the unfortunate truth.