Platini's suggestion for the Champions league

eurxe · Posted: Thu Aug 30, 2007 9:34 pm

UEFA's president has some new ideas for the CL and for the UEFA cup.

For the CL:

Quote:

the UEFA Champions League group stage would continue to comprise 32 teams as now. A total of 22 teams would qualify automatically - the title-holders, three clubs each from the top three associations in the UEFA rankings, two each from the associations in positions 4-6, and one each from positions 7-12. This would mean six more teams qualifying automatically than at present, and increase the number of guaranteed places for mid-range national associations.

Two qualifying routes
It would then leave ten remaining group-stage places. Two qualifying routes are proposed - a three-round qualifying phase featuring 40 domestic champions, which would lead to six more champion clubs qualifying for the group stage, and another two-round qualifying phase involving the domestic cup winners of the first 16 associations in the UEFA rankings, with four domestic cup winners going through to the group stage.

For the UEFA cup:

Quote:

The proposed new UEFA Cup format for 2009-12 features a group stage involving 48 teams - the title-holders, ten teams from the UEFA Champions League qualifying phase and 37 teams from the UEFA Cup qualifying phase. These 48 teams would be divided into 12 groups of four teams playing six matches on a home-and-away basis. The group-winners and runners-up would go into the knock-out stage and would be joined by eight teams who finished third in their groups in the UEFA Champions League group stage.

The decision will be made in November.

I really like the CL idea. I always thought that winning the FA cup is harder than coming 4th in the league. I also think this idea is better for smaller countries and maybe it'll give teams from nations like Israel a better chance of getting into the CL. Also the home and away matches for the UEFA cup group stage is a better idea than what they have now.

What do you think?

Tom_Nufc · Posted: Thu Aug 30, 2007 10:33 pm

i think im confused.

Rc_Lens · Posted: Thu Aug 30, 2007 11:37 pm

It's better.

Johaldo8 · Posted: Thu Aug 30, 2007 11:56 pm

It's fcukin w@nk.

Platini's trying to make his mark, but by feeding us all that sh!t, he'll lose the respect of the top clubs pretty soon.

Let's face it: the Champions' League as it currently stands it pretty much what the European Super League would have been, with a few minnows making up the numbers. It has enough clubs from all of the major national leagues to compete in Europe's premier competition. There's nothing wrong with te current format at all in my opinion, save for the actual name (Champions' League it isn't, maybe they should just rename it to the European Super League?).

With all due respect, the prospect of having of small team from the Serbian league or the Macedonian league playing in the Champions' League is not very glamorous is it? Most of us would like to the see the best footballers play, and they all play for the best european teams.

Rc_Lens · Posted: Fri Aug 31, 2007 12:31 am

Johaldo8 wrote:

It's fcukin w@nk.

Platini's trying to make his mark, but by feeding us all that sh!t, he'll lose the respect of the top clubs pretty soon.

Let's face it: the Champions' League as it currently stands it pretty much what the European Super League would have been, with a few minnows making up the numbers. It has enough clubs from all of the major national leagues to compete in Europe's premier competition. There's nothing wrong with te current format at all in my opinion, save for the actual name (Champions' League it isn't, maybe they should just rename it to the European Super League?).

With all due respect, the prospect of having of small team from the Serbian league or the Macedonian league playing in the Champions' League is not very glamorous is it? Most of us would like to the see the best footballers play, and they all play for the best european teams.

I don't agree it's now that is boring, the CL was more interesting before because most of the countries had a big team and the CL was interesting from the beginning to the end. Now it's only after the quarter that it can be interesting.

Give us back the old european cup, it was something else and it was not the same each year. Confused

Gazza-LFC · Posted: Fri Aug 31, 2007 12:33 am

His idea is to give the lesser countries the chance to compete,but what is the point when they all will get trounced every season just like a team like Rosenborg do every year,it's a pathetic idea just to get some brownie points and to say he's had a hand in the competition,it would be better if he resigned because he's beginning to scare me with his ideas Twisted Evil

Rc_Lens · Posted: Fri Aug 31, 2007 12:47 am

The matchs were more intenses in the old european cups because there was not a second chance, you go on or you come back next season if you're qualified. Now i have the impression that all the teams are all qualified because the 2 first are qualified and the 3rd go in uefa cup. So why are we doing these 6 matchs ? for what ? only one is out. Confused

eurxe · Posted: Fri Aug 31, 2007 5:45 am

Rc_Lens wrote:

The matchs were more intenses in the old european cups because there was not a second chance, you go on or you come back next season if you're qualified. Now i have the impression that all the teams are all qualified because the 2 first are qualified and the 3rd go in uefa cup. So why are we doing these 6 matchs ? for what ? only one is out. Confused

This way you get more matches which is good for 2 reasons.
1) More games to broadcast = more money for the teams and UEFA.
2) For small clubs like Haifa for example the prospect of playing 6 european games in the big league is almost like being promised a place in heaven. Most of you come from countries who have at least 2 representatives in the CL so you dont know how big a deal it is for the smaller countries to get a team in the CL.

And Johaldo, about the prospect of the likes of Serbian teams, does Rosenborg ruin the game? Did Basel? Did Haifa? I dont think so.

Rc_Lens · Posted: Fri Aug 31, 2007 9:32 pm

eurxe wrote:

Rc_Lens wrote:

The matchs were more intenses in the old european cups because there was not a second chance, you go on or you come back next season if you're qualified. Now i have the impression that all the teams are all qualified because the 2 first are qualified and the 3rd go in uefa cup. So why are we doing these 6 matchs ? for what ? only one is out. Confused

This way you get more matches which is good for 2 reasons.
1) More games to broadcast = more money for the teams and UEFA.
2) For small clubs like Haifa for example the prospect of playing 6 european games in the big league is almost like being promised a place in heaven. Most of you come from countries who have at least 2 representatives in the CL so you dont know how big a deal it is for the smaller countries to get a team in the CL.

And Johaldo, about the prospect of the likes of Serbian teams, does Rosenborg ruin the game? Did Basel? Did Haifa? I dont think so.

I understand but in the old european cup there was 32 teams in the first round and 32 teams from 32 countries. I think it was better for the small clubs. Wink

eurxe · Posted: Fri Aug 31, 2007 9:44 pm

Rc_Lens wrote:

I understand but in the old european cup there was 32 teams in the first round and 32 teams from 32 countries. I think it was better for the small clubs. Wink

Unfortenetly that wont work today because the big teams will just leave UEFA and form their own league just like it happened in the european basketball.