Remove this ad

#161 [url]

Jan 10 17 9:34 PM

mattsanger92 wrote:
a Cup Winners Cup could be FIFA's ticket.

Good. Now that we've found a way for FIFA to make even more money, our mission is complete.

Quote    Reply   
Remove this ad
avatar

TheRoonBa

Posts: 5,414 Site Admin

#162 [url]

Jan 11 17 1:10 PM

It would be interesting to hold a "World Cup for Clubs" that mirrored the actual World Cup for nations (with the league champion club of each of the World Cup countries).

Quote    Reply   

#164 [url]

Jan 11 17 9:46 PM

nfm24 wrote:
mattsanger92 wrote:
a Cup Winners Cup could be FIFA's ticket.

Good. Now that we've found a way for FIFA to make even more money, our mission is complete.
Hooray!

But remember that we don't give them this for free, take screenshots of this conversation so we can claim commission. Maybe hire a solicitor for backup too as I'm not sure my D in A-Level Law will cut it...

Quote    Reply   

#165 [url]

Jan 12 17 12:25 AM

mattsanger92 wrote:
But remember that we don't give them this for free, take screenshots of this conversation so we can claim commission. Maybe hire a solicitor for backup too as I'm not sure my D in A-Level Law will cut it...
Hmm, your D beats my unclassified did-not-even-know-there-was-such-a-thing, but I think some sort of declared copyright or patent might be needed, rather than a screenshot.

Of course, any new tournament needs a name, and CWC is unwieldy, so I propose the Sir Joseph S. Blatter Megacup

(the 'S' stands for transparency)

As with all international football philanthropists, I will happily sell my share of the TV rights provided they are paid to my Swiss bank account through a company based in the BVI. 

Quote    Reply   

#166 [url]

Jan 12 17 6:09 PM

nfm24 wrote:
mattsanger92 wrote:
But remember that we don't give them this for free, take screenshots of this conversation so we can claim commission. Maybe hire a solicitor for backup too as I'm not sure my D in A-Level Law will cut it...
Hmm, your D beats my unclassified did-not-even-know-there-was-such-a-thing, but I think some sort of declared copyright or patent might be needed, rather than a screenshot.
Can competition formats be patented? It's generally only names that get the copyright treatment, if we launched a pan-European football club competition then surely UEFA wouldn't have a case as long as we made the distinctions clear.

And the screenshots are merely to show we have timestamped proof if they ever try to take the discussed ideas for free, usually the response to that kind of thing is to settle before it gets to court. If they did try to leave us short-changed, that's when threaten them with our legal team, or failing that a team of amateur Indonesian hackers...

Quote    Reply   

#168 [url]

Jan 14 17 12:07 PM

So now that we've figured that one out, what to do about UEFA? New president says he'll review the Champions League changes that were rushed in before he got there, but even if it does revert back to its safe current format, it can't be too long before someone proposes change once again (or tries to force it by holding a European Super League-shaped gun to UEFA's head (that I'm convinced is actually more like a taser really)), so in light of recent events why not make that change an expansion to a 48-team group stage?

Now they could do things the easy way and just have the new World Cup format with two-legged fixtures, but my proposal (trying to just work these out of my system) would be an alternative that takes advantage of the two-legged system, keeps the 4-team group, and brings the 'Champions' back into 'Champions League'. First the teams that qualify for the group stage:

  • All teams that currently get automatic group stage qualification keep it (22)
  • Champions of the next 9 leagues (13th-21st) that don't already are given automatic group stage (9)
  • 2 extra 'non-champion' group stage qualifiers added for high leagues (such as a 4th team for the best league or a 2nd team for the 7th league) (2)
  • The teams coming in from the 'champions' path of qualifying increases from 5 to (8)
  • The teams coming in from the 'league' path of qualifying increases from 5 to (7)
As for the format:
  • 'Champions' path is for all champions of the 22nd-55th leagues, played over 3 qualifying rounds
  • 'League' path is for 23 non-champions (or lottery winners or something, not giving that one up smiley: wink), 9 first-round winners join 5 byed clubs in final qualifying round to find 7 qualifiers
  • 48-team group stage is 12 groups of 4, played home & away as usual, top 2 progress to knockouts as usual (and something similar to before for Europa League drop-ins), but:
  • The best 8 group winners recieve a bye to the Round of 16
  • The other 4 group winners, and all 12 runners-up, play the 'Round of 24', group winners & best 4 runners-up get home 2nd-leg seeding
  • Ro24 games are fit into the first half of that abnormally long stretch UEFA use for the Ro16 right now, the second half is for the new Ro16, like the Europa League does right now
  • Then continue as normal
Fits in more clubs, especially more champions (by my count a healthy 29/55 with less rounds creating a wider scope for variety), and if all else fails provides more excitement and incentive for winning the group (and winning it well). Ceferin, Paypal me.

Last Edited By: mattsanger92 Jan 14 17 12:28 PM. Edited 1 time.

Quote    Reply   

#169 [url]

Jan 14 17 6:23 PM

The Champions' League suffers a bit from the same problem as the European Championship (inc Qualifiers), in that most of the "big" teams don't play each other until late in the tournament. They might think about a way to have more matches involving 'big' teams against each other, throughout the earlier stages of the competition. But obviously that tends towards a super league format.

Quote    Reply   

#170 [url]

Jan 15 17 9:40 PM

nfm24 wrote:
They might think about a way to have more matches involving 'big' teams against each other, throughout the earlier stages of the competition. But obviously that tends towards a super league format.
I'm still of the opinion that a European Super League, without some kind of gradual expansion or at least interation with competitions outside their closed shop, would self-implode quite quickly. Too many matches between the big clubs would begin to lose meaning and with it interest, while the clubs themselves might become disillusioned at a relative lack of success (imagine Juventus finishing in the bottom half of the table for 5 seasons in a row or something).

If my proposal was put in, the CL group stage would still have plenty of token glamour games provided they kept the 'champions in pot 1' seeding system. Plus the extra 'round of 24' provides a little variation as well as an additional opportunity for those big-ticket games to take place, provided they actually progress that far.

Quote    Reply   
Remove this ad

#171 [url]

Jan 16 17 9:18 AM

Fairly minor tweaks are preferable to a large league. At the moment, most of the most money-raking games of the champions league happen within the same handful of weeks during the KO stages or the odd group game in a group of death. As the European matches are confined to particular midweek dates there isn't a lot of spread over TV schedules, although in recent years UEFA have managed to spread KO leg schedules over two weeks instead of one.

I always thought that the international calendar, cramming all important international qualifiers onto the same day or two, was a financial own goal by FIFA. Consider the last round of WC qualifiers in November. After a fairly mundane campaign of minnow bashing, we arrive on the last round of fixtures and there could be around 20 or more really "big" decisive games all on the same day, and then a few days later, another 20 crammed onto the same day. Of course there is a bit of spread over time zones, but it can surely be arranged more effectively.

At this point I should declare a self-interest related to the difficulties in trying to follow a dozen games simultaneously on dodgy online streams...

Quote    Reply   

#172 [url]

Jan 16 17 7:20 PM

So UEFA's 'Week of Football' concept (2 rounds of matches spread over 6 days, or 1 over 3) has your approval, or could they stretch it even further?

Did I mention before that one of the proposed changes to the CL to appease the big clubs was a round of knockout games at the 32-team stage, the winners progressing to 2 groups of 8 (playing 14 games each)? No idea how it would have worked beyond that part, but the idea was presumably to make as many of those big-ticket games as possible, guess those behind it assumed that part makes up for a huge number of those games being dead rubbers.

And on a similar note to the World Cup thing, part of the CL changes set to be put in will be a couple of games per night being moved to the 'Russian timeslot' (a couple of hours before the majority) regardless of location. Combine that with my 48-team idea and an even split between these timeslots on each day and you have a choice of 6 games each in 4 periods every week (and a bonus even earlier slot if FC Astana make the group stages again), as well as little point in stretching the Ro16 out for over a month...

Quote    Reply   

#173 [url]

Jan 16 17 9:45 PM

It has my approval in that sense i.e. convenience for streamability, and also is probably thus the profit making solution, but it doesn't necessarily have my overall approval morally. Then again, most club football doesn't. Personally I hardly watch the Champions League - last season the only game I watched live was the final. It's rubbish.

Quote    Reply   

#174 [url]

Jan 17 17 5:25 PM

TheRoonBa wrote:
It would be interesting to hold a "World Cup for Clubs" that mirrored the actual World Cup for nations (with the league champion club of each of the World Cup countries).
Not that I'd support this idea in general, but the idea's intrigued me enough to provide a glimpse of what it could be team-wise. If we base it on the reigning league champion as of the start of summer 2014, the following 32 clubs would qualify:
  • USM Alger (Algeria)
  • River Plate (Argentina)
  • Brisbane Roar (Australia)
  • Anderlecht (Belgium)
  • HSK Zrinjski Mostar (Bosnia and Herzegovina)
  • Cruzeiro (Brazil)
  • Coton Sport (Cameroon)
  • Colo-Colo (Chile)
  • Atletico Nacional (Colombia)
  • Deportivo Saprissa (Costa Rica)
  • Dinamo Zagreb (Croatia)
  • Emelec (Ecuador)
  • Manchester City (England)
  • Paris Saint-Germain (France)
  • Bayern Munich (Germany)
  • Asante Kotoko (Ghana)
  • Olympiacos (Greece)
  • CD Olimpia (Honduras)
  • Foolad (Iran)
  • Juventus (Italy)
  • Sewe Sport (Ivory Coast)
  • Sanfrecce Hiroshima (Japan)
  • Club Leon (Mexico)
  • Ajax (Netherlands)
  • Kano Pillars (Nigeria)
  • Benfica (Portugal)
  • CSKA Moscow (Russia)
  • Pohang Steelers (South Korea)
  • Atletico Madrid (Spain)
  • FC Basel (Switzerland)
  • Sporting Kansas City (United States)
  • Danubio (Uruguay)

Quote    Reply   

#175 [url]

Jan 17 17 9:08 PM

I like the principle of the World Club Cup going directly to national champions rather than taking only continental winners. But the majority of clubs (outside the stellar names) having a lack of a constituency beyond their own borders, so would be less of an attraction in general than the equivalent match between national teams. Especially nowadays where good players are siphoned away early. Not that we should always be thinking along those lines, but just practicalities. Taking just the last two names, Danubio vs Sporting Kansas would not look much like Uruguay vs USA. And would this tournament run over the season (like CL) or in summer (like WC)? Different countries have different domestic seasons, which is currently a major obstacle to the FIFA CWC.

Quote    Reply   

#176 [url]

Jan 19 17 11:34 PM

AFP report, 28 Sep 1983
Plans for a World Club Championship, on the lines of the World Cup, are underway and the first tournament could be held in 1985.  English F.A. spokesman Glen Kirton admitted that his association was studying proposals put to it by FIFA.
[...]
If the competition were to be held in 1985, it is believed that it would feature 12 clubs, four from Europe, four from South America, two from the Third World or North America, and two clubs invited by the organisers.
There are at present no qualifying conditions laid down for the competition, but Kirton said it was envisaged that the last four winners of the European Club Champions Cup, and the last four winners of the Copa Libertadores, would form the backbone of the lineup.



Quote    Reply   

#177 [url]

Jan 20 17 7:33 PM

nfm24 wrote:
AFP report, 28 Sep 1983
Plans for a World Club Championship, on the lines of the World Cup, are underway and the first tournament could be held in 1985.  English F.A. spokesman Glen Kirton admitted that his association was studying proposals put to it by FIFA.
[...]
If the competition were to be held in 1985, it is believed that it would feature 12 clubs, four from Europe, four from South America, two from the Third World or North America, and two clubs invited by the organisers.
There are at present no qualifying conditions laid down for the competition, but Kirton said it was envisaged that the last four winners of the European Club Champions Cup, and the last four winners of the Copa Libertadores, would form the backbone of the lineup.

Participants would have been:
  • Aston Villa
  • Hamburg
  • Liverpool
  • Juventus
  • Flamengo
  • Penarol
  • Gremio
  • Independiente
  • 4 others
Also, nice to see some recognition for the vaguely-described "Third World".

Reminded me of when I looked up the competition's past and discovered that before the ISL collapse, Scotland were attempting to host the cup.

Quote    Reply   

#178 [url]

Jan 21 17 12:41 PM

Not clear whether the term "Third World" came from Mr Kirton, or the AFP journo, or the original proposal. Either way FIFA had clearly learned almost nothing from the history of the World Cup itself.

Quote    Reply   

#180 [url]

Feb 15 17 7:01 PM

Whether or not they actually read it, it looks as though my idea for a 48-team Champions League group stage is picking up steam. Purely coincidental, I'm sure.

And after that being written yesterday it emerges that some of Europe's biggest-name clubs outside the 'elite' are also pushing for that expansion. The opposition they face is Rummenigge & Co, who apparently think the previous changes weren't enough and want to condense the group stage to 24 clubs, presumably retaining the automatic passage for the 16 clubs from the top 4 leagues, (which would mean a maximum of 8 places would be competed for by clubs from 51 nations).

The mind boggles at their unashamed levels of greed (especially after their "football not commerce" shtick aimed at FIFA), but on a practical level I don't have a clue what they think they'll achieve by getting that format, like the super league idea I think they'd enjoy several years of the absoloute high life before the whole thing implodes, like Barcelona (analogy starts and finishes with last night's game in the likely event that it turns out to be a freak result).

Quote    Reply   
Remove this ad
Add Reply

Quick Reply

bbcode help