UEFA's proposed 3 tier competitions

[Footballfirst]

The European Leagues have responded to UEFA's proposals in the following statement.

 

https://europeanleagues.com/european-leagues-present-proposals-for-uefa-club-competitions/

 

Quote

European Leagues Present Proposals for UEFA Club Competitions

• Leagues welcome UEFA’s proposed three tier competition format
• Proposal for more inclusive access list
• Substantial rise of solidarity payments in order to protect competitive balance

Following the UEFA Club Competitions (UCC) reform adopted in August 2016 and ahead of the upcoming decisions to be taken by UEFA and its National Associations for the 21/24 UCC cycle, European Leagues have taken the initiative to work on proposals for improving professional Club Competitions in Europe.

An extensive and comprehensive model was presented and endorsed today by the European Leagues during the Association’s General Assembly held in Frankfurt, Germany.

The Leagues welcomed the new innovative three tier competition format (UCL / UEL / UEL2 with 32 clubs each) proposed by UEFA which will allow more clubs from more National Associations to participate to European Club Competitions. In addition, the Leagues outlined the need for a new and more inclusive access list and a new revenue distribution model where solidarity is properly recognised to restore and support competitive balance in domestic competitions.

Specifically, the European Leagues’ model proposes the following improvements to UCC:

Access List – A more inclusive model with:

• Access for each participating club in every UCC must always be based on the latest performance of clubs in their respective domestic top tier league competition and/or domestic Cup. The only exception are the winners of the respective UCC competitions.
• An aggregate minimum of 36 (approximately 2/3 of the Access List) domestic champions must take part in the Group Stages of all the UCC.
• The vast majority of members of the European Leagues support the concept that the UEFA Champions League (UCL) should have a maximum of 3 Direct Access (plus 1 Play-off/Qualifying Round) spots to the Group Stage from an individual National Association.

Calendar – A proper balance between UCC and Domestic Competitions including:

• A total of 72 Calendar Days, representing 25 weeks, are reserved for UCC matches (i.e. Qualification – PR/QR/PO, Group Stage, Knock-out and Finals).
• UCC matches are always played on Weekdays (defined as Tuesday, Wednesday and Thursday) except the Final of the UCL, which is on a Saturday. All other Finals (SCUP, UEL, UEL2) are to be played on Weekdays.
• Weekdays not reserved for UCC or for National Team matches are for either Domestic League or Domestic Cup competitions.
• Domestic League matches are primarily played on Weekends (defined as Friday, Saturday, Sunday and Monday), except those Weekends being part of international weeks that are reserved for National Team matches.

Revenue Distribution Model – A financial distribution based on three pillars:

• The Distribution ratio between the 3 competitions should be reduced. In particular, the ratio between UCL and UEL should not exceed a maximum of 3.5:1, while the ratio between UEL and UEL2 should be a maximum of 2.5:1.
• Within Competition Financial Distribution – the Club Coefficient distribution pillar should be removed with the money being reallocated to the Market Pool. The concept of historical titles should not form part of the distribution model within a competition due to its distortive effect to competitive balance.
• Solidarity Payments – The total percentage of solidarity payments should be significantly increased to help reduce the increasing financial gap in European club football. The increased solidarity percentage should be primarily used for Non-Participating Clubs of both National Associations with and without clubs in the Group Stage of the UCL. Furthermore, the European Leagues propose to include within solidarity the creation of a new Professional Football Development pillar which represents a unique opportunity for National Associations to support the development of professional football in medium and small countries all across Europe, including non-top tier leagues. Under this proposal, a percentage of solidarity payments would be allocated for development projects with focus on youth development, fan engagement, infrastructures, fight against match-fixing and fight against piracy, among other activities. The top five National Associations of UEFA Association Club Coefficient would be excluded from this development pillar to further enhance competitive balance across Europe.

Claus Thomsen, Vice-President of the European Leagues stated: “A fair and democratic Club Competition model both in terms of access and revenue distribution is something I believe all stakeholders – clubs, leagues, national associations and of course the fans fully support. The plan which we are launching today is, in our view, a comprehensive and complete plan with a fresh approach, fresh ideas that will contribute positively to protect and enhance competitive balance across European Football. Maintaining competitive balance is one of the greatest challenges we face in European football today. We have already shared our plans with UEFA and we now look forward to a period of constructive discussion and co-operation together with them and other football stakeholders as we look to secure a brighter future for European football at every level”
 

 

I would expect some opposition from the big 5 leagues if their share of the revenue is reduced by this move.

Edited October 19, 2018 by Footballfirst

[Heartsofgold]

What a pile of pish.  More pork for the UEFA barrel.

 

By definition the CHAMPIONS LEAGUE should be for the champions of each members nations top league, not for the priviledged few.  I despise what this has done to our game and never watch these games now.  Utter dog shit.

[John Findlay]

5 minutes ago, Heartsofgold said:

What a pile of pish.  More pork for the UEFA barrel.

 

By definition the CHAMPIONS LEAGUE should be for the champions of each members nations top league, not for the priviledged few.  I despise what this has done to our game and never watch these games now.  Utter dog shit.

Succinctly put madam/sir.

[peter_hmfc]

7 minutes ago, Heartsofgold said:

What a pile of pish.  More pork for the UEFA barrel.

 

By definition the CHAMPIONS LEAGUE should be for the champions of each members nations top league, not for the priviledged few.  I despise what this has done to our game and never watch these games now.  Utter dog shit.

 

That would mean Santa Coloma of Andorra and B36 Torshavn of the Faroe Islands being included but not the likes of Dortmund and Liverpool when they don't win their league.

[Phil Dunphy]

4 minutes ago, peter_hmfc said:

 

That would mean Santa Coloma of Andorra and B36 Torshavn of the Faroe Islands being included but not the likes of Dortmund and Liverpool when they don't win their league.

 

Cool. 

 

Maybe it would mean these clubs start concentrating on winning silverware, rather than finishing in the top 4. 

[Harry Potter]

19 minutes ago, Heartsofgold said:

What a pile of pish.  More pork for the UEFA barrel.

 

By definition the CHAMPIONS LEAGUE should be for the champions of each members nations top league, not for the priviledged few.  I despise what this has done to our game and never watch these games now.  Utter dog shit.

Hope its less complicated than the latest nations league carry on, talk about jobs for the boys, that lot just create work. 

[Dusk_Till_Dawn]

14 minutes ago, peter_hmfc said:

 

That would mean Santa Coloma of Andorra and B36 Torshavn of the Faroe Islands being included but not the likes of Dortmund and Liverpool when they don't win their league.

 

So what

[JamboAl]

23 minutes ago, peter_hmfc said:

 

That would mean Santa Coloma of Andorra and B36 Torshavn of the Faroe Islands being included but not the likes of Dortmund and Liverpool when they don't win their league.

Are they not equal members?

[micole]

30 minutes ago, Heartsofgold said:

What a pile of pish.  More pork for the UEFA barrel.

 

By definition the CHAMPIONS LEAGUE should be for the champions of each members nations top league, not for the priviledged few.  I despise what this has done to our game and never watch these games now.  Utter dog shit.

My thoughts exactly, never watch Chumpions league games, it should be just for "the champions" but it has turned into a money making excersie .

[micole]

24 minutes ago, peter_hmfc said:

 

That would mean Santa Coloma of Andorra and B36 Torshavn of the Faroe Islands being included but not the likes of Dortmund and Liverpool when they don't win their league.

And your point is.....don't call it the Champions League then.

[JamboGraham]

Not too bad a response from the European Leagues, whilst they appear to be accepting that the genie is out of the bottle with regard to the UCL they are looking to maintain qualification criteria at its current level (rather than it getting even more exclusive to the bigger clubs). Insisting that entry is maintained to current performance rather than fast tracking historically big clubs, etc.

 

I also support the proposals on the distribution ratios and although it seems a given; the request for protection of the weekend for domestic football is very important. I am surprised that the UEFA competitions haven't come after more weekend dates to be honest...clearly the leagues think they will at some point...

[Pans Jambo]

42 minutes ago, Heartsofgold said:

What a pile of pish.  More pork for the UEFA barrel.

 

By definition the CHAMPIONS LEAGUE should be for the champions of each members nations top league, not for the priviledged few.  I despise what this has done to our game and never watch these games now.  Utter dog shit.

Same. Total sheite!

[Heartsofgold]

46 minutes ago, peter_hmfc said:

 

That would mean Santa Coloma of Andorra and B36 Torshavn of the Faroe Islands being included but not the likes of Dortmund and Liverpool when they don't win their league.

 

Yes it could and should mean that if they are CHAMPIONS of there domestic league. 

 

And **** yes. If Dortmund and Liverpool don’t win their domestic top league then they don’t play until the so called ****ing CHAMPIONS league as they are not CHAMPIONS. Or do you think that finishing 2nd 3rd air even Firth in a league competition merits a redefinition of the word champion. I for sure as **** don’t think it does. 

Edited October 19, 2018 by Heartsofgold

[peter_hmfc]

37 minutes ago, Dusk_Till_Dawn said:

So what

 

So in Europes elite league, the prime tournament of European football (the best association in the world), you want to exclude some of the biggest clubs in the world such as Borussia Dortmund, Liverpool and Barcalona in favour of part-time clubs from mini-nations? Or would you rather have a fairer proportion of clubs from each nation based on their size and what they can bring to the table?

 

28 minutes ago, JamboAl said:

Are they not equal members?

 

Do part-time leagues such as the Faroe Islands and San Marino deserve as many places as countries such as Spain and Germany? Bear in mind the latters clubs who finish 4th often have average attendances similar to the entire population of the formers entire country.

Funny how people advocate that these countries should have equal places in the CL yet insist that they're a waste of time being in the Euros and WC qualifying.

 

26 minutes ago, micole said:

And your point is.....don't call it the Champions League then.

 

So your problem is the name of the tournament then?

 

7 minutes ago, Heartsofgold said:

 

Yes it could and should mean that if they are CHAMPIONS of there domestic league. 

 

And **** yes. If Dortmund and Liverpool don’t win their domestic top league then they don’t play until the so called ****ing CHAMPIONS league as they are not CHAMPIONS. Or do you think that finishing 2nd 3rd air even Firth in a league competition merits a redefinition of the word champion. I for sure as **** don’t think it does. 

 

Such anger and hostility. Sounds like your problem is the name of the tournament itself. I'll add in some pointless swear-words you can understand.

 

****, *****, ****table, shovel****able.

[Debut 4]

1 hour ago, Phil Dunphy said:

 

Cool. 

 

Maybe it would mean these clubs start concentrating on winning silverware, rather than finishing in the top 4. 

And would gain financially to help build their own clubs and standards. 

 

Its about time the wealth was spread out.

[peter_hmfc]

Do Hearts fans realise that with only 1 Champions League place that would make it significantly harder for us to make it in?

 

Do Hearts fans realise that if only one team from each nation made it into the CL then the remaining clubs would (likely) go in the Europa League, thus making it far harder for us to progress than it already it?

 

Or would we then be better off in the new 3rd tier tournament that people are so against on here?

[BerraBelieveit]

Champions League should be a competition were the 55 winners of each European League compete to call themselves the best in Europe, the champions of all champions. 

 

Any one who is against has a flawed perception of football. This would make every domestic league more exciting and let's be honest - it would make watching any game on TV more exciting. 

 

Champions League group stage is the same boring thing every single season - get a couple of crackers from last 16 onward but that's about it. 

 

If teams like Barcelona, Real Madrid, Juventus, Liverpool, PSG want to all play each other because they are financially on par in comparison to the rest of the European Champions.... then they can make a wee league for themselves every second summer when there's no Euros or World Cup. 

 

Also, if they did a proper Champions League, they'd get a shock at the outcome. It would not be as predictable as anyone would think. 

 

[JamboGraham]

Surely any return to a European Cup of old would now be a poor replacement for what was initially a very, very good tournament, The Champions League. Yes, the name is stupid but the original concept was good, the continual expansion of it to the point of blatant shoehorning of Europe's biggest clubs is what has damaged it so much.

 

 

[Spitonastranger]

1 hour ago, peter_hmfc said:

 

That would mean Santa Coloma of Andorra and B36 Torshavn of the Faroe Islands being included but not the likes of Dortmund and Liverpool when they don't win their league.

The clue is in the title, Champions League. It doesn't matter who is then in it, would you ban non league or lower league teams from cup competitions.  

[JamboGraham]

5 minutes ago, BerraBelieveit said:

Champions League should be a competition were the 55 winners of each European League compete to call themselves the best in Europe, the champions of all champions. 

 

Any one who is against has a flawed perception of football. This would make every domestic league more exciting and let's be honest - it would make watching any game on TV more exciting. 

 

Champions League group stage is the same boring thing every single season - get a couple of crackers from last 16 onward but that's about it. 

 

If teams like Barcelona, Real Madrid, Juventus, Liverpool, PSG want to all play each other because they are financially on par in comparison to the rest of the European Champions.... then they can make a wee league for themselves every second summer when there's no Euros or World Cup. 

 

Also, if they did a proper Champions League, they'd get a shock at the outcome. It would not be as predictable as anyone would think. 

 

 

I agree with a lot of your points but I can't see how it would make every domestic league more exciting, where would the new excitement be in the SPFL for example?

Edited October 19, 2018 by JamboGraham

[peter_hmfc]

1 minute ago, Spitonastranger said:

The clue is in the title, Champions League. It doesn't matter who is then in it, would you ban non league or lower league teams from cup competitions.  

 

Already answered that twice now, sounds like your problem is in the tournaments name itself?

 

You kind of supported my argument with the cup comparison there. In the Scottish Cup for example it's outlined in favour of the bigger teams as Premier League clubs don't have to play until the 4th round, I've never seen any Hearts fans complaining trying to get us into the 1st round with Burntisland Shipyard.

[peter_hmfc]

3 minutes ago, JamboGraham said:

 

I agree with a lot of your points but I can't see how it would make every domestic league more exciting, where would the new excitement be in the SPFL for example?

 

There would be less excitement with less European places to play for.

[micole]

38 minutes ago, peter_hmfc said:

 

So in Europes elite league, the prime tournament of European football (the best association in the world), you want to exclude some of the biggest clubs in the world such as Borussia Dortmund, Liverpool and Barcalona in favour of part-time clubs from mini-nations? Or would you rather have a fairer proportion of clubs from each nation based on their size and what they can bring to the table?

 

 

Do part-time leagues such as the Faroe Islands and San Marino deserve as many places as countries such as Spain and Germany? Bear in mind the latters clubs who finish 4th often have average attendances similar to the entire population of the formers entire country.

Funny how people advocate that these countries should have equal places in the CL yet insist that they're a waste of time being in the Euros and WC qualifying.

 

 

So your problem is the name of the tournament then?

 

 

Such anger and hostility. Sounds like your problem is the name of the tournament itself. I'll add

Edited October 19, 2018 by micole

[normando]

9 minutes ago, peter_hmfc said:

 

There would be less excitement with less European places to play for.

Bring back the cup winners cup a good tournament.and when teams get put out at group stages in champions league that should be them out,no eufa consolation cup. 

[peter_hmfc]

2 minutes ago, micole said:

Yup I do have a problem with the name, maybe it should be called the "Elite European cup" or just The European cup....oh wait we have already had that one . The so called CL has turned into a bloated monster IMO ,christ you can finish 4th in certain "elite" leagues and still qualify for the CL...what is that all about ?.

 

So complain about the name then not the format.

 

Because finishing 4th in the Bundesliga is far harder than winning the Sammarinese league. Or do you think they're equal and interchangeable? Would you rather sign a player (for example) who had won the Sammarinese league or the Bundesliga?

Edited October 19, 2018 by peter_hmfc

[micole]

1 minute ago, peter_hmfc said:

 

Because finishing 4th in the Bundesliga is far harder than winning the Sammarinese league. Or do you think they're equal and interchangeable?

So tell me this then what was the problem with the original European cup set up, probably not making enough money, It would appear that smaller nations teams have little or no chance of qualifying for the CL but I suppose if teams from elite leagues qualify it's ok then.

[Stroller19]

2 minutes ago, peter_hmfc said:

 

So complain about the name then not the format.

 

Because finishing 4th in the Bundesliga is far harder than winning the Sammarinese league. Or do you think they're equal and interchangeable? Would you rather sign a player (for example) who had won the Sammarinese league or the Bundesliga?

 Well it's easy for a German team with millions in the bank to win the Sammarinese league, but it isn't easy for a Sammarinese team with a few hundred to win the Sammarinese league. You're basically saying the the Champions League is purely for the rich clubs with the smaller sides with less money getting a token fixture in the first qualifying round.

 

It isn't a champion's league, so maybe the naming is an issue, but that doesn't make it a good competition either

[peter_hmfc]

2 minutes ago, micole said:

So tell me this then what was the problem with the original European cup set up, probably not making enough money, It would appear that smaller nations teams have little or no chance of qualifying for the CL but I suppose if teams from elite leagues qualify it's ok then.

 

I don't know. The European Cup ended in 1992. Given I was born in the '90s how do you expect me to remember it?

 

They have no chance because they come from nations that have populations smaller than our league cup semi attendance? Why should bigger clubs who bring more to the table be held back to make way for mini-nations who'd send a part-time team on part with Scottish League 1?

[Heartsofgold]

36 minutes ago, peter_hmfc said:

Do Hearts fans realise that with only 1 Champions League place that would make it significantly harder for us to make it in?

 

Do Hearts fans realise that if only one team from each nation made it into the CL then the remaining clubs would (likely) go in the Europa League, thus making it far harder for us to progress than it already it?

 

Or would we then be better off in the new 3rd tier tournament that people are so against on here?

 

Exactly what are our chances of making it in just now may I ask?  Don't bother answering as it's zero, nil, nada, no chance.  Even if we won the SPFL we enter the lowest QUALIFYING round for a tournament that we should, as National champions, by right be straight into the group stages but because the biggest pigs at the trough are allowed to have their 1-3 top clubs in the top tournament, then our National Champions have to make do with 2nd tier, or even no European competition.  Do you think that's fair, I sure as shit don't.

 

The so called Champions League has been created to keep the vast majority of money within the top 20-30 clubs in Europe, no matter how many of them are actual champions. 

 

Remember the days when Hearts actually competed against clubs like Bayern Munich, Athletico Madrid, Feyenoord and many others.  We didn't win a lot but we were on a reasonably level playing field.  A far distant memory I'm afraid.

[peter_hmfc]

10 minutes ago, JamboFox said:

 Well it's easy for a German team with millions in the bank to win the Sammarinese league, but it isn't easy for a Sammarinese team with a few hundred to win the Sammarinese league. You're basically saying the the Champions League is purely for the rich clubs with the smaller sides with less money getting a token fixture in the first qualifying round.

 

It isn't a champion's league, so maybe the naming is an issue, but that doesn't make it a good competition either

 

How far down the German league would you have to go before you found a team who couldn't win the Sammarinese or Andorran league? Even a Scottish League 2 team could probably win it. Yet Tre Fiori should be prioritised ahead of Schalke because well, one nation one place.

 

 

 

Edited October 19, 2018 by peter_hmfc

[micole]

2 minutes ago, peter_hmfc said:

 

I don't know. The European Cup ended in 1992. Given I was born in the '90s how do you expect me to remember it?

 

They have no chance because they come from nations that have populations smaller than our league cup semi attendance? Why should bigger clubs who bring more to the table be held back to make way for mini-nations who'd send a part-time team on part with Scottish League 1?

Don't your age mate.  So the CL should really only apply to countries with large or reasonable populations, and the rest can just lump it.

[poultry]

1 hour ago, Heartsofgold said:

What a pile of pish.  More pork for the UEFA barrel.

 

By definition the CHAMPIONS LEAGUE should be for the champions of each members nations top league, not for the priviledged few.  I despise what this has done to our game and never watch these games now.  Utter dog shit.

Been saying the same thing for years.

[peter_hmfc]

1 minute ago, micole said:

Don't your age mate.  So the CL should really only apply to countries with large or reasonable populations, and the rest can just lump it.

 

Point out to me where I said only countries with big populations should be allowed in.

[micole]

2 minutes ago, peter_hmfc said:

 

Point out to me where I said only countries with big populations should be allowed in.

You mention countries with lower pop than our LC semi, but I'll rephrase it, only countries that can bring more to the table should be allowed in the CL. As I said the rest can just suck it up, the post made by Heartsofgold sums it up IMO.

[BerraBelieveit]

47 minutes ago, JamboGraham said:

 

I agree with a lot of your points but I can't see how it would make every domestic league more exciting, where would the new excitement be in the SPFL for example?

 

I could type for hours and hours and hours on the restructuring of European Club Competition –

 

Hearts and teams similar would then attract a better quality of player. A player is much more likely to get into a Champions League containing just Champions playing for Hearts than he is playing for middle of the road teams in leagues “bigger” than the Premier League in Scotland.

 

Nations were the league is dominated by one club would soon become more competitive as everyone with a realistic chance would be putting their eggs in the “win the league” basket. For example, Roma & Napoli keep pace with Juventus but fall away and then settle for “we will get in the Champions League” anyway. Winning the league would become the be all and end all if you want to compete in the top competition in Europe.

 

There would still be another European Competition therefore the likes of Spurs still get their boring glamour game against some other European giant and can fight to win a competition containing quality opposition. This competition would not be seeded at all and it would just names in a hat. This would give a better chance for teams in smaller nation’s leagues to get further in the competition – thus putting themselves on the map for potential players and also giving their current players a platform to show their ability to a wider audience.

 

Champions of smaller nations would be getting increased revenue thus improving the overall standard of their club at all levels. When Leicester won the league they got a massive wind fall; the Champions’ League group stage returned them millions of pounds but so did the other English clubs competing therefore they never really caught up at all in order to sustain. Under a new model, they would definitely bridge the gap as they will be the only English team in the Champions League. I understand the revenue streams, fan base already built up by some clubs is merely impossible to catch up on.

 

Players would feel more comfortable staying in their home countries to play football and develop as opposed to going overseas to achieve the dream of playing in the Champions League.

All points have holes and flaws but I would just love a Champions League for Champions only. I’d rather watch a two legged affair between the Champions of Bulgaria and Serbia than watch Liverpool vs PSG in the Champions League Group Stage twice where both will probably qualify anyways.

 

Also, as someone said above, ditch this parachute from competition. When you’re out of Europe, you are out. Again, this would give teams a chance to catch up on revenue. Celtic get put out the Champions League first round and lose all potential revenue from fixtures in the competition while Hearts win the UEFA Cup and get gate receipts at 7/8 more games than Celtic. Every little helps.

[Guest]

2 hours ago, peter_hmfc said:

 

That would mean Santa Coloma of Andorra and B36 Torshavn of the Faroe Islands being included but not the likes of Dortmund and Liverpool when they don't win their league.

 

That would be my preference. Knock-out European Cup like the old days. By all means have another league - "Rich *******s League" or something for the money as that's what it's about - but I'd love to see a proper European Cup again along with the UEFA Cup.

[BM1874]

It might make it “rubbish” per se

But there are 55 members of Uefa

make the champions league for the league champions only

 

thrn make the Europe league for the teams in league places, limiting to 3/4 per nation

 

and the 3rd competition should be a cup winner cup

(so for Scotland league cup and Scottish) 

 

would it be better for hearts? Hopefully 

 

 

worst case (personally) would be renaming champions league to something more appropriate since there’s hardly any actual league champions involved 

[Brighton Jambo]

I’m somewhere in the middle on this. While I agree that the current set up has become a bloated money making machine I really don’t get how flooding Europeans premier cup competition with lots of extremely poor teams makes for a better competition.  From s purest point of view maybe from a quality of games perspective defo not, look what happened when to a much lesser extent they did that in the Euros in 2016.

 

also, for many of us qualifying for the champions league was one of the highlights of the last 20 years.  In this new structure he chances of us doing that again get even less. 

[obua]

1 hour ago, peter_hmfc said:

 

Point out to me where I said only countries with big populations should be allowed in.

You sound like you only want to watch the best teams from the top footballing countries in the champions league.Thats ok but don’t call it the champions league .

[Nookie Bear]

2 hours ago, peter_hmfc said:

 

So in Europes elite league, the prime tournament of European football (the best association in the world), you want to exclude some of the biggest clubs in the world such as Borussia Dortmund, Liverpool and Barcalona in favour of part-time clubs from mini-nations? Or would you rather have a fairer proportion of clubs from each nation based on their size and what they can bring to the table?

 

 

Do part-time leagues such as the Faroe Islands and San Marino deserve as many places as countries such as Spain and Germany? Bear in mind the latters clubs who finish 4th often have average attendances similar to the entire population of the formers entire country.

Funny how people advocate that these countries should have equal places in the CL yet insist that they're a waste of time being in the Euros and WC qualifying.

 

 

So your problem is the name of the tournament then?

 

 

Such anger and hostility. Sounds like your problem is the name of the tournament itself. I'll add in some pointless swear-words you can understand.

 

****, *****, ****table, shovel****able.

 

I bet you own a fine collection of half and half scarves. 

[Nookie Bear]

Hey UEFA, Either invite everyone or just have the guts to bash on with the European League that you are desperate to create. 

[reaths17]

1 hour ago, peter_hmfc said:

 

I don't know. The European Cup ended in 1992. Given I was born in the '90s how do you expect me to remember it?

 

They have no chance because they come from nations that have populations smaller than our league cup semi attendance? Why should bigger clubs who bring more to the table be held back to make way for mini-nations who'd send a part-time team on part with Scottish League 1?

the european cup was way better than this turgid shit they call the champs league, same 16 teams every damned year, like our wee league playing the same teams over and over is boring. the other thing that should be scrapped is seeding, if you want to claim to be the best then you should be able to do it without being aided by a rigged draw.

[Bozi]

4 hours ago, peter_hmfc said:

Do Hearts fans realise that with only 1 Champions League place that would make it significantly harder for us to make it in?

 

Do Hearts fans realise that if only one team from each nation made it into the CL then the remaining clubs would (likely) go in the Europa League, thus making it far harder for us to progress than it already it?

 

Or would we then be better off in the new 3rd tier tournament that people are so against on here?

Didn't too us too badly when we beat the mighty Bayern Munich at Tynecastle, or Atletico Madrid, or drew with Red Star Belgrade..... 

[peter_hmfc]

2 hours ago, obua said:

You sound like you only want to watch the best teams from the top footballing countries in the champions league.Thats ok but don’t call it the champions league .

 

 

1 hour ago, Nookie Bear said:

 

I bet you own a fine collection of half and half scarves. 

 

The only half/half scarf I have is the Dave McKay tribute scarf from when we played Spurs, and I don't even know where that is anymore.

 

1 hour ago, reaths17 said:

the european cup was way better than this turgid shit they call the champs league, same 16 teams every damned year, like our wee league playing the same teams over and over is boring. the other thing that should be scrapped is seeding, if you want to claim to be the best then you should be able to do it without being aided by a rigged draw.

 

Cool. I don't care about the European Cup though. I've never cared about a competition that was already defunct by the time I was born.

 

5 minutes ago, Bozi said:

Didn't too us too badly when we beat the mighty Bayern Munich at Tynecastle, or Atletico Madrid, or drew with Red Star Belgrade..... 

 

So one user says we have "zero, zilch, nada" chance of competing, another says we can take the like of Bayern and Athletico.

 

Okay.

[Bozi]

5 minutes ago, peter_hmfc said:

 

 

 

The only half/half scarf I have is the Dave McKay tribute scarf from when we played Spurs, and I don't even know where that is anymore.

 

 

Cool. I don't care about the European Cup though. I've never cared about a competition that was already defunct by the time I was born.

 

 

So one user says we have "zero, zilch, nada" chance of competing, another says we can take the like of Bayern and Athletico.

 

Okay.

Nah the point is that we used to come up against European heavyweights in the old UEFA cup/ Cup winner Cup format and we fared a lot better, both as a club and nationally. What we need is more exposure to European football to love forward 

[portobellojambo1]

5 hours ago, peter_hmfc said:

 

That would mean Santa Coloma of Andorra and B36 Torshavn of the Faroe Islands being included but not the likes of Dortmund and Liverpool when they don't win their league.

 

Is that not the whole idea of a tournament that is referred to as The Champions League though, i.e. it should be aimed at those clubs who have won their domestic championship. At the moment the number of clubs per country admitted into that overall competition revolves around how many TV sets are located in the relevant country, meaning the vast majority of the competing clubs are getting in by default, rather than being champions. It is then effectively aimed at stay at home people rather than football fans in general. Personally I'd much rather the Champions League reverted to the same format as the old European Cup, and became a home and away knock out tournament again from round one, but that is just personal opinion.

[Guest]

4 hours ago, Brighton Jambo said:

I’m somewhere in the middle on this. While I agree that the current set up has become a bloated money making machine I really don’t get how flooding Europeans premier cup competition with lots of extremely poor teams makes for a better competition.  From s purest point of view maybe from a quality of games perspective defo not, look what happened when to a much lesser extent they did that in the Euros in 2016.

 

also, for many of us qualifying for the champions league was one of the highlights of the last 20 years.  In this new structure he chances of us doing that again get even less. 

 

It depends on who you think football is for. Supporters of individual clubs who don't care about the quality of games and will always be excited about competing in any tournament or a mass TV audience attracted by the "glamour" fixtures that are actually more often than not pretty boring. Without the former group the latter would have nothing to watch, but the first group get overlooked time and time again in favour of the TV fans.

 

Football in the top leagues is like the housing bubble now though. It's inflated so much for so long that the only way we can ever get back to some sort of level playing field is if there's a huge crash and/or major rule/law changes.

Edited October 19, 2018 by Guest

[Guest]

5 hours ago, Heartsofgold said:

 

Exactly what are our chances of making it in just now may I ask?  Don't bother answering as it's zero, nil, nada, no chance.  Even if we won the SPFL we enter the lowest QUALIFYING round for a tournament that we should, as National champions, by right be straight into the group stages but because the biggest pigs at the trough are allowed to have their 1-3 top clubs in the top tournament, then our National Champions have to make do with 2nd tier, or even no European competition.  Do you think that's fair, I sure as shit don't.

 

The so called Champions League has been created to keep the vast majority of money within the top 20-30 clubs in Europe, no matter how many of them are actual champions. 

 

Remember the days when Hearts actually competed against clubs like Bayern Munich, Athletico Madrid, Feyenoord and many others.  We didn't win a lot but we were on a reasonably level playing field.  A far distant memory I'm afraid.

 

This is the thing for me and I can sympathise with Celtic when they complained about having to play all these qualifying rounds as legitimate champions. Although they then lose my sympathy because they seem to think it's OK to get parachuted into the Europa League group stages. I think if you're knocked out of a tournament you shouldn't get to join another one as a consolation prize.

[N Lincs Jambo]

There used to be 3 European competitions. Since the advent of the Champions League (what a feckin misnomer that is!) and the abolition of the Cup Winners Cup, teams from the largest countries aren't interested in Europe if they're not in the CL. They field reserve sides in the Europa League because for example, the EPL is much more of a money spinner for them.

 

You might be interested to know that even now, Scottish sides have more European tournament victories than one of the current big 5 (and recent World Cup winners), France (excluding the Inter-Toto which they did quite well in).

 

In my time, I have seen Hearts play Bayern home and away and almost put them out with an excellent performance in Germany, I have seen Dundee Utd get in a European Cup semi-final where they hammered Roma but the final scoreline of 2-0 didn't reflect this, and also make a European final in 87. Aberdeen won a CWC and then defeat the EC winners Hamburg to win the Super Cup.

 

Nowadays the entire model is about having as many teams from the largest, richest countries participate so that their sponsors and advertisers can market to them. That obviously means England, Germany, Spain, Italy and France. There's no place at the table for "diddy" countries like Scotland. Look at how even countries with a serious European pedigree like the Netherlands are now treated...

[Toggie88]

Did nobody actually read the OP?

 

The proposal is seeking to lower the number of entrants from one country (to 3 max). Also, 36 domestic league winners must be in the group stages across the 3 competitions. 

 

This might not be restricting the champions league to just domestic winners as most want, but it’s a step in that direction. 

 

Also, the new fairer split in revenue is definitely to be welcomed. 

Edited October 19, 2018 by Toggie88