Uefa to consider scrapping Europa League and extending Champions League

grenache

So Monsieur Platini and co want to ba$tardise the once noble European Cup even further, by turning it into some mega round robin cash drainer for fans - a "champions" tournament where a team can finish as low as 6th & qualify :rolleyes:

Absolute buffoonery of the highest order. I used to think of Platini as a refreshing alternative to that Swiss muppet over FIFA. Now I know that he's just as c*ntish as Blatter.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/sport/football/competitions/europa-league/9706994/Michel-Platini-Uefa-are-considering-scrapping-Europa-League-and-extending-Champions-League.html#

Uefa president Michel Platini has admitted that his organistion are considering scrapping the Europa League in favour of extending the Champions League.

Asked about possible plans to extend the elite Champions League at the expense of the second-tier Europa League on Wednesday by the Ouest-France., Platini said: "There is an ongoing debate to determine what form the European competitions will have between 2015 and 2018.

"We're discussing it, we will make a decision in 2014. Nothing is decided yet."

ShooterSF

I don't like it but something has to be done about the Europa league. Maybe splitting Europe in half for the first few stages to save travelling might help but too many teams don't seem to care for it.

SirDelboy18

grenache wrote: »

So Monsieur Platini and co want to ba$tardise the once noble European Cup even further, by turning it into some mega round robin cash drainer for fans - a "champions" tournament where a team can finish as low as 6th & qualify :rolleyes:

Absolute buffoonery of the highest order. I used to think of Platini as a refreshing alternative to that Swiss muppet over FIFA. Now I know that he's just as c*ntish as Blatter.

Wouldn't surprise me - the Europa League needs to be reformatted. Lack of finance and lack of prestige lead to the situation where teams don't care. This only adds a bit of ridicule to it.

The way to fix that would be to lower the allocations from each European League into the Champions League. Then there would at least be a bit of quality in the Europa League, which would get TV stations interested and get clubs more interested (because of added revenue), producing higher quality games. All of this would be achieved while enhancing the prestige of the Cl due to fewer teams etc, a true competition of the elite. I'd also remove the 3rd place dropping into the lower competition - in some cases it's seen as a more of a punishment then out of Europe completely and that tells you all you need to know

My proposal will never happen - a pity too.

Columbia

They could boost the Europa League very quickly by giving a Champions League place to the winners.

Also stop dumping the Champions League also-rans into the Europa League. You qualify for one competition, you compete in one competition.

corcaigh07

the Uefa Cup was a fantastic competition when the Champions League was exactly that, for Champions. Now the Europa League is just too much a case of the also-rans. And yes, I am a Liverpool fan. It's sad to think that we were in a very strong position to qualify for the next round last week and still its a better decision to rest first teamers.

Columbia

Columbia wrote: »

They could boost the Europa League very quickly by giving a Champions League place to the winners.

.

This.

It would be a massive incentive to all clubs competing in it, and benefit the competition greatly.

K-9

Getting a CL place for winning it would help give it prestige. Once they opened up the CL it was automatically going to effect the competition. Reintroducing the Cup Winners Cup would be more meaningful at this stage.

dsmythy

rarnes1 wrote: »

This.

It would be a massive incentive to all clubs competing in it, and benefit the competition greatly.

I'd say plenty of clubs already have a big interest in winning the Europa League. Just because the teams from the biggest 5 or so leagues might be less enthused doesn't mean it's worthless. Look at the passion in recent finals for evidence and the turnouts for games in smaller league teams' games.

intellectual dosser

It would be very difficult to add to the prestige of the Europa League without reducing the prestige of the Champions League. Prestige is nearly always going to be derived from the comparison between the two.

I can agree with giving a CL place to the EL winners - but its hard to find any other solution beyond that, and that in itself isnt enough to make the Europa League any better.

If you eradicate the EL and make the CL bigger, it will still only fatten the wallets of the richer clubs leaving the minnows in the dark IMO - could Shamrock Rovers qualify for the new Champions League given that they could only once scrape into the Europa?

bucketybuck

The answer to this problem has always been obvious to any football person. The fact that it hasn't been implemented just reinforces what everybody knows, that the money men run football, not football men.

Make the Champions league for Champions only, and for the Europa league, make it straight knock out again rather than the retarded group system it has currently. At a stroke you would make it more prestigious/attractive to clubs.

intellectual dosser

bucketybuck wrote: »

The answer to this problem has always been obvious to any football person. The fact that it hasn't been implemented just reinforces what everybody knows, that the money men run football, not football men.

Make the Champions league for Champions only, and for the Europa league, make it straight knock out again rather than the retarded group system it has currently. At a stroke you would make it more prestigious/attractive to clubs.

That Europa League sounds good....but would that Champions League final not be

ManU/ManC/Che v BAR/RealM

......every year for the next 20 years.

BayernM and AC Milan to make novelty appearances now and again.

Soups123

bucketybuck wrote: »

The answer to this problem has always been obvious to any football person. The fact that it hasn't been implemented just reinforces what everybody knows, that the money men run football, not football men.

Make the Champions league for Champions only, and for the Europa league, make it straight knock out again rather than the retarded group system it has currently. At a stroke you would make it more prestigious/attractive to clubs.

This ^
If football men ran it the above wud be the case, throw in a CL spot for the Europa winners too. European competition will keep evolving until there is a 20 team European Premier league, Premier A & Premier B......

Fight_Night

intellectual dosser wrote: »

That Europa League sounds good....but would that Champions League final not be

ManU/ManC/Che v BAR/RealM

......every year for the next 20 years.

BayernM and AC Milan to make novelty appearances now and again.

In the last 10 years who has made the final that isn't a big Man Utd-esque team? Porto and Monaco are the only ones that spring to mind.

I personally would like a Super Bowl format, purely for my own selfish reasons but it realistically wouldn't work.

Your Airbag

Platini can suck my balls in all fairness.

bucketybuck

intellectual dosser wrote: »

That Europa League sounds good....but would that Champions League final not be

ManU/ManC/Che v BAR/RealM

......every year for the next 20 years.

BayernM and AC Milan to make novelty appearances now and again.

Its my opinion that the current formats of the Champions league and Europe league have made the strong teams stronger and left the others behind. When I was a kid and the competitions were straight knock out teams like Ajax and Marseille were able to compete. For me its a shame that teams with great history like Ajax are just also-rans in todays game.

You can even keep the group stages for the champions league if you want. But the Europa league is toxic because it is a bunch of meaningless group games. Make it straight knock out and the big teams might just see it as something worth paying attention to.

bucketybuck

bucketybuck wrote: »

The answer to this problem has always been obvious to any football person. The fact that it hasn't been implemented just reinforces what everybody knows, that the money men run football, not football men.

Make the Champions league for Champions only, and for the Europa league, make it straight knock out again rather than the retarded group system it has currently. At a stroke you would make it more prestigious/attractive to clubs.

Agreed.

However, the money generated from the current setup would dwarf the old system.

Money talks.

At the very least they should rename it taking out the "Champions" part

LuckyLloyd

Eh, am I the only one who thinks a giant two legged knockout competition (with open draw) of every team qualified for the European Cup would be awesome?

LuckyLloyd

LuckyLloyd wrote: »

Eh, am I the only one who thinks a giant two legged knockout competition (with open draw) of every team qualified for the European Cup would be awesome?

It would be.

However,how many games would there be? Would more cash be generated from selling tv rights etc? If the answer is no, it'll never be a runner unfortunately.

Leiva

LuckyLloyd wrote: »

Eh, am I the only one who thinks a giant two legged knockout competition (with open draw) of every team qualified for the European Cup would be awesome?

.... then the CL proper begins ???

MaroonAndGreen

1. Give a Champions League place to the winner.. (Instantly Spurs, Liverpool etc will start taking the Europa League seriously)
2. I think the straight knockout idea is a good one, two legged ties though!
3. Maybe cut the amount of Champions League places the top countries get, maybe only 2 or 3 each in the CL from Spain, England, Germany and Italy.

These would be my suggestions to improve the Europa League!

Chucky the tree

Problem is a CL only open to the winners would then make the EL a better competition than the CL.

The_Kew_Tour

Chucky the tree wrote: »

Problem is a CL only open to the winners would then make the EL a better competition than the CL.

really?

Chucky the tree

The_Kew_Tour wrote: »

really?

I think so. For example this year CL would be:

Salzburg, Basel, Nordsjaelland, Man City, Real Madrid, Montepellier, Olympiakos, Helsinki, Shamrock Rovers, Juventus, Molde, Ajax, Legia Warsaw, Porto, Steau Bucharast, CSKA Moscow, Celtic, EElfsborg, Galasary, Dortmund, Chelsea


Even more teams I have mentioned from the likes of Northern Ireland, Wales, Latvia, Lithuania, Cyprus, etc. As neutral there are tons of matches I wouldn't be to pushed about watching from that lot.

In the EL you'd have:
United, Spurs, Liverpool, Barca, Valancia, Malaga, Athletic Madrid, Levante, Ac Milan, Napoli, Udinese, Lazio, Bayern Munich, Schalke, Munchingladback, Leverkusen, Stuggart, Benfica, Braga, Sporting lisbon, Paris SG, Lillie, Lyon.


That's before you add all the other leagues, obviously you'd need to cut down but I think their would be far more competitive and enjoyable matches in the Europa League than the CL.

Benimar

Chucky the tree wrote: »

I think so. For example this year CL would be:

In the EL you'd have:
Chelsea, United, Spurs, Liverpool, Barca, Valancia, Malaga, Athletic Madrid, Levante, Ac Milan, Napoli, Udinese, Lazio, Bayern Munich, Schalke, Munchingladback, Leverkusen, Stuggart, Benfica, Braga, Sporting lisbon, Paris SG, Lillie, Lyon.


That's before you add all the other leagues, obviously you'd need to cut down but I think their would be far more competitive and enjoyable matches in the Europa League than the CL.

Chelsea would have been in the CL as holders.

As many have said, the EL winners should get a spot in next seasons CL.

Also:
- Stop parachuting teams into the EL from the CL half way through.
- Both competitions should be open draw. 2 legs straight knockout. If Man U draw Real Madrid in the 1st round, then so be it. It will never happen because of the money, but it was a better competition before the seeding and group stages were introduced.

BetterCallSaul

The current CL format is great imo.

The Europa League is a mess.

There was around 21,000 at SJP for Newcastle's last home game. We used to get twice that gate against poor Championship sides.

There are far too many games before it gets interesting and the 3rd place CL losers starting the next round is absolutely ridiculous.

Fixing those issues would improve it a lot, but a 64 team CL is not the answer.

GavRedKing

I'd leave the UCL as is.

I would however be in favour of a no seeding, straight knock out in the Europa League and that no UCL 3rd place teams would fall in.

Also, the winner of in the Europa League should get a palce in next years UCL.

bullvine

I hate the champions league, as a United fan I'm sick of hearing we won it 5 times bla bla from liverpool fans, they won 4 in an era when you would be lucky to play a good team in the final never mind the semi's, United would easily have a couple of more wins by now if it wasn't this new format.

It makes me angry...

super_furry

I wouldn't stop with giving the winners a Champions League spot, I'd give one to both finalists and even consider a third/fourth place play off for one.

Benimar

bullvine wrote: »

I hate the champions league, as a United fan I'm sick of hearing we won it 5 times bla bla from liverpool fans, they won 4 in an era when you would be lucky to play a good team in the final never mind the semi's, United would easily have a couple of more wins by now if it wasn't this new format.

It makes me angry...

I don't want to turn this into (yet another) Man U v Liverpool debate, but you are aware that in one of the years Man U won the CL, they wouldn't have even qualified for it under the old format???

Some may argue that the 'old' format was harder, as one slip up and you were out. Liverpool (winners 77 and 78) were knocked out by Notts Forest (winners 79) in the first round of the 78/79 season. Would never happen now.

Leiva

I know I'm on my own with this one, but I would give the winners of the domestic cups in each league a spot in the CL league.

Just imagine the intensity it would inject into the FA Cup.

If the FA Cup winner ends up in the top 3 then it goes to 4th spot.

Amirani

bullvine wrote: »

I hate the champions league, as a United fan I'm sick of hearing we won it 5 times bla bla from liverpool fans, they won 4 in an era when you would be lucky to play a good team in the final never mind the semi's, United would easily have a couple of more wins by now if it wasn't this new format.

It makes me angry...

I disagree. It's not like the Group Stages have hampered them much. By in large the times they've failed to win the Champions League has been because they were knocked out in the knockout stages.

Also, Liverpool were the dominant team in World football in that era, same can't be said about United right now.

Amirani

Leiva wrote: »

I know I'm on my own with this one, but I would give the winners of the domestic cups in each league a spot in the CL league.

Just imagine the intensity it would inject into the FA Cup.

If the FA Cup winner ends up in the top 3 then it goes to 4th spot.

I'd do the same.

Will I Amnt

The Champions League is grand the way it is. Absolutely no need to change it at all.
As soon as you start diluting it with rubbish teams from every corner of Europe it will turn to shìt.
The bigger teams will be sending second string teams off to play f**cking Metalist or Dnipro??
No thanks. Keep that shìt in the Europa League.

bullvine

bullvine wrote: »

I hate the champions league, as a United fan I'm sick of hearing we won it 5 times bla bla from liverpool fans, they won 4 in an era when you would be lucky to play a good team in the final never mind the semi's, United would easily have a couple of more wins by now if it wasn't this new format.

It makes me angry...

Fantastic insight there.

Leiva

bullvine wrote: »

I hate the champions league, as a United fan I'm sick of hearing we won it 5 times bla bla from liverpool fans, they won 4 in an era when you would be lucky to play a good team in the final never mind the semi's, United would easily have a couple of more wins by now if it wasn't this new format.

It makes me angry...

:pac:

ArmaniJeanss

Benimar wrote: »

Some may argue that the 'old' format was harder, as one slip up and you were out. Liverpool (winners 77 and 78) were knocked out by Notts Forest (winners 79) in the first round of the 78/79 season. Would never happen now.

In fairness anyone who said that would be taking the piss, it was by a huge factor an easier competition to win back then. (And I say that as a Liverpool fan).

Also the Pool/Forest 'first round' tie as you refer to it was a Last 32 tie, so in effect only round ahead of the current knockout stages at which you are basically guaranteed a tricky tie anyway. So hardly evidence of it being harder back then.

Benimar

ArmaniJeanss wrote: »

In fairness anyone who said that would be taking the piss, it was by a huge factor an easier competition to win back then. (And I say that as a Liverpool fan).

Also the Pool/Forest 'first round' tie as you refer to it was a Last 32 tie, so in effect only round ahead of the current knockout stages at which you are basically guaranteed a tricky tie anyway. So hardly evidence of it being harder back then.

Well, it certainly wan't easier. An extra knock out round to get through, as opposed to 6 group games, which automatically favours the better sides. It's a lot harder to knock out a 'better' team over 6 games than it is over 2, especially now with the groups being seeded.

Will I Amnt

Benimar wrote: »

Well, it certainly wan't easier. An extra knock out round to get through, as opposed to 6 group games, which automatically favours the better sides. It's a lot harder to knock out a 'better' team over 6 games than it is over 2, especially now with the groups being seeded.

Am I picking this up wrong or are you arguing against your original point now?

K-9

ArmaniJeanss wrote: »

In fairness anyone who said that would be taking the piss, it was by a huge factor an easier competition to win back then. (And I say that as a Liverpool fan).

Also the Pool/Forest 'first round' tie as you refer to it was a Last 32 tie, so in effect only round ahead of the current knockout stages at which you are basically guaranteed a tricky tie anyway. So hardly evidence of it being harder back then.

It was easier for the best teams to retain it, hence a good few teams that did. The other side of that, a team could do a "Chelsea" over 2 legs and that was you out early, no group stages that usually are predictable.

ctrl-alt-delete

super_furry wrote: »

I wouldn't stop with giving the winners a Champions League spot, I'd give one to both finalists and even consider a third/fourth place play off for one.

I'd go as far as an automatic place in the groups for the winner and a qualifying round spot for runner up, playoff idea is too much.

The Champions League has too many in it at the moment, making it up to 64 would be ridiculous.

IncognitoMan

Id be up for this if the entry to it was say top 3/4 in the top European leagues and then the FA cup/country equivalent cup winners instead of a 5th place team for e.g. If it is extended no more than 5 should go from one country

Would give the FA cup such importance. If the team that wins it already has CL then give it to next placed team in the league. FA cup final day would be huge

Sorry if this has already been said

Benimar

cambo2008 wrote: »

Am I picking this up wrong or are you arguing against your original point now?

You are picking it up wrong.

I made a point that it could be argued it was harder to win it under the 'old' format. (Not that it definitely was, just that it could be argued) I then followed it up by saying that it could be more dangerous for the 'good' teams to have to play a 2 legged knock out round, than to play 6 group games.

For example, over 2 games Cetic would have taken Barcelona to extra time, but over 6 games, Barca walk the group.

thebaz

great idea - the europa league has been a disaster since its inception - the Cup winners cup and uefa cup were much better -

padd b1975

GavRedKing wrote: »

Also, the winner of in the Europa League should get a palce in next years UCL.

At the expense of which league?

Will I Amnt

Benimar wrote: »

You are picking it up wrong.

I made a point that it could be argued it was harder to win it under the 'old' format. (Not that it definitely was, just that it could be argued) I then followed it up by saying that it could be more dangerous for the 'good' teams to have to play a 2 legged knock out round, than to play 6 group games.

For example, over 2 games Cetic would have taken Barcelona to extra time, but over 6 games, Barca walk the group.

Yes. Meaning that the better teams make up the last 16 and the poorer teams are filtered out of the competition more often than not. This makes it a harder competition from there on in whereas in the old format you could get an easy run further into the competition.

Gbear

rarnes1 wrote: »

This.

It would be a massive incentive to all clubs competing in it, and benefit the competition greatly.

I really think this point is overstated.

Even for one of the relative heavy-weights in the EL or teams like City who qualify through the CL group stages - the probability of winning it is pretty small.

It wouldn't be a massive incentive. It'd be a tiny incentive right up until the quarter finals, when it would start looking like a real possibility. And at that stage any team would start taking it seriously anyway.

I don't think that the possibility of getting a CL spot 13 games away is enough for teams like Newcastle, Spurs or Liverpool to start prioritising the EL over the domestic league.

bullvine

rarnes1 wrote: »

Fantastic insight there.

Whats wrong with what I said, I'm stating the obvious and yes I am well aware that United won it in 99 when they weren't champions.

Benimar

cambo2008 wrote: »

Yes. Meaning that the better teams make up the last 16 and the poorer teams are filtered out of the competition more often than not. This makes it a harder competition from there on in whereas in the old format you could get an easy run further into the competition.

Not necessarily, With the absence of seeding you could get a hard run the whole way, or an easy run. Each year would be different. Its a bit like the FA cup in that sense.

All I am saying is that it isn't as straightforward as saying that either the old or new systems are 'easier'.

Also, if a team was knocked out in Round one, it doesn't matter how easy the other rounds would have been

bullvine

NiallSparky wrote: »

I disagree. It's not like the Group Stages have hampered them much. By in large the times they've failed to win the Champions League has been because they were knocked out in the knockout stages.

Also, Liverpool were the dominant team in World football in that era, same can't be said about United right now.

Its not the group stages that's the problem, its the inclusion of 10 to 12 good teams instead of 2-3 good ones, like it was before 1992. The likes of Steau, Redstar Belgrade and Celtic will probably never win it again because the simple fact of the matter is that they'll need to play about 5 sides better than them before they win it.

Vurnon San Benito

Columbia wrote: »

They could boost the Europa League very quickly by giving a Champions League place to the winners.

Also stop dumping the Champions League also-rans into the Europa League. You qualify for one competition, you compete in one competition.

And what team would miss out on their place if this came into effect? What league would be down one place?

bullvine

I actually think the champions of their own league should get some more of an advantage, look at City, there gone out but United are true even though runners up last year, personally its a little unfair. They should be rewarded for winning the league even though they've no pedigree in Europe.