[CL] Champions League 2012/13 (61 Viewers)
- Thread starter Azzurri7
- Start date
Group stages are dull every year, except for one or two groups.
Letting in less teams from each country would also help return things to the days when European competitions other than the European Cup/CL were viewed as a big deal.
Would mean less money in the CL, but would be more interesting and spread the cash around a bit more between the competitions.
Letting in less teams from each country would also help return things to the days when European competitions other than the European Cup/CL were viewed as a big deal.
Would mean less money in the CL, but would be more interesting and spread the cash around a bit more between the competitions.
I'm with Red on this one, far too many shitty clubs taking part with no hope of ever making it past the group stages. It just delays the inevitable, the stronger teams knocking one another out and putting on proper footie games.
I too would prefer Arsenal, the opportunity to beat them and rub a few of my mates' noses in it would just be unreal.
I too would prefer Arsenal, the opportunity to beat them and rub a few of my mates' noses in it would just be unreal.
Group stages are logical and neccecary, especially for italian competitions.
knockouts would be very hard on teams's who's season starts later, like serie a for example, were as others allready got an edge.
For smaller teams, it also gives a nice revenue boost, because they are assured of 6 game starter fee's, and 3 home game sellouts.
its also a way for youngsters to get a chance if a team is allready qualified.
knockouts would be very hard on teams's who's season starts later, like serie a for example, were as others allready got an edge.
For smaller teams, it also gives a nice revenue boost, because they are assured of 6 game starter fee's, and 3 home game sellouts.
its also a way for youngsters to get a chance if a team is allready qualified.
Red's suggesting would actually involve a lot more shitty teams since the league winners of bad leagues (e.g. Cyprus and Finland) wouldn't need to qualify for the Champions League. Therefore, I think you could use your own argument against you. Why let the champions of Cyprus play the first knock-out match if they are going to draw FC Barcelona and get knocked out anyway? It just delays the inevitable. 
I like the current version, actually. It secures 6 games for everyone which means a lot financially for the smaller clubs. However, not so beneficial for the smaller leagues that it means that the champions of shitty leagues as Finland and Luxembourg will get directly into the tournament (like they used to be in the early 90's). Basically, now the Champions League involves almost all the best teams in Europe with the exception of few smaller newcomers. Not every league champions will manage to participate in the Champions League as they did back in the early 90's, but if they manage to qualify, it will give them a huge financial boost. Sure, some groups won't be as exciting as others, but most the early knock-out games in the old structure weren't either. And even on the final match day there are still interesting games going on (Shakhtar-Juve, PSG-Porto), and since there only are two match days and all games are played at 20.45, it's never a problem to find an exciting match to watch.
I like the current version, actually. It secures 6 games for everyone which means a lot financially for the smaller clubs. However, not so beneficial for the smaller leagues that it means that the champions of shitty leagues as Finland and Luxembourg will get directly into the tournament (like they used to be in the early 90's). Basically, now the Champions League involves almost all the best teams in Europe with the exception of few smaller newcomers. Not every league champions will manage to participate in the Champions League as they did back in the early 90's, but if they manage to qualify, it will give them a huge financial boost. Sure, some groups won't be as exciting as others, but most the early knock-out games in the old structure weren't either. And even on the final match day there are still interesting games going on (Shakhtar-Juve, PSG-Porto), and since there only are two match days and all games are played at 20.45, it's never a problem to find an exciting match to watch.
Red's suggesting would actually involve a lot more shitty teams since the league winners of bad leagues (e.g. Cyprus and Finland) wouldn't need to qualify for the Champions League. Therefore, I think you could use your own argument against you. Why let the champions of Cyprus play the first knock-out match if they are going to draw FC Barcelona and get knocked out anyway? It just delays the inevitable.
I like the current version, actually. It secures 6 games for everyone which means a lot financially for the smaller clubs. However, not so beneficial for the smaller leagues that it means that the champions of shitty leagues as Finland and Luxembourg will get directly into the tournament (like they used to be in the early 90's). Basically, now the Champions League involves almost all the best teams in Europe with the exception of few smaller newcomers. Not every league champions will manage to participate in the Champions League as they did back in the early 90's, but if they manage to qualify, it will give them a huge financial boost. Sure, some groups won't be as exciting as others, but most the early knock-out games in the old structure weren't either. And even on the final match day there are still interesting games going on (Shakhtar-Juve, PSG-Porto), and since there only are two match days and all games are played at 20.45, it's never a problem to find an exciting match to watch.
I like the current version, actually. It secures 6 games for everyone which means a lot financially for the smaller clubs. However, not so beneficial for the smaller leagues that it means that the champions of shitty leagues as Finland and Luxembourg will get directly into the tournament (like they used to be in the early 90's). Basically, now the Champions League involves almost all the best teams in Europe with the exception of few smaller newcomers. Not every league champions will manage to participate in the Champions League as they did back in the early 90's, but if they manage to qualify, it will give them a huge financial boost. Sure, some groups won't be as exciting as others, but most the early knock-out games in the old structure weren't either. And even on the final match day there are still interesting games going on (Shakhtar-Juve, PSG-Porto), and since there only are two match days and all games are played at 20.45, it's never a problem to find an exciting match to watch.
Red's suggesting would actually involve a lot more shitty teams since the league winners of bad leagues (e.g. Cyprus and Finland) wouldn't need to qualify for the Champions League. Therefore, I think you could use your own argument against you. Why let the champions of Cyprus play the first knock-out match if they are going to draw FC Barcelona and get knocked out anyway? It just delays the inevitable.
I like the current version, actually. It secures 6 games for everyone which means a lot financially for the smaller clubs. However, not so beneficial for the smaller leagues that it means that the champions of shitty leagues as Finland and Luxembourg will get directly into the tournament (like they used to be in the early 90's). Basically, now the Champions League involves almost all the best teams in Europe with the exception of few smaller newcomers. Not every league champions will manage to participate in the Champions League as they did back in the early 90's, but if they manage to qualify, it will give them a huge financial boost. Sure, some groups won't be as exciting as others, but most the early knock-out games in the old structure weren't either. And even on the final match day there are still interesting games going on (Shakhtar-Juve, PSG-Porto), and since there only are two match days and all games are played at 20.45, it's never a problem to find an exciting match to watch.
I like the current version, actually. It secures 6 games for everyone which means a lot financially for the smaller clubs. However, not so beneficial for the smaller leagues that it means that the champions of shitty leagues as Finland and Luxembourg will get directly into the tournament (like they used to be in the early 90's). Basically, now the Champions League involves almost all the best teams in Europe with the exception of few smaller newcomers. Not every league champions will manage to participate in the Champions League as they did back in the early 90's, but if they manage to qualify, it will give them a huge financial boost. Sure, some groups won't be as exciting as others, but most the early knock-out games in the old structure weren't either. And even on the final match day there are still interesting games going on (Shakhtar-Juve, PSG-Porto), and since there only are two match days and all games are played at 20.45, it's never a problem to find an exciting match to watch.
That would work if all leagues across Europe were somewhat equally competitive, but they are not. You can't compare Spain, England and Italy with Norway, Estonia and the like. I'd put money on the 5th and 6th placed teams from the top 3 leagues, being champions in those lower, less competitive leagues. The Champions league today is much more interesting, competitive and difficult to win than it was in the old era.