JP Morgan is in talks to provide a debt package worth around $6bn to a new FIFA-backed European Premier League, which Liverpool and Manchester United - and clubs from Germany, Italy and Spain - are in talks to join.

https://news.sky.com/story/top-english-clubs-in-bombshell-talks-to-join-european-premier-league-12109175

Sounds like it could be interesting. I'm a big Bayern fan, so I'd love this idea and play strong clubs every week.

Ugh

Indeed.

Nope. Wont watch, and I would maybe just give up on European ball altogether if they did it.

European league is endgame of the Premier League's American owners

I'm mixed on this.

I don't disagree that structural changes are probably necessary and maybe even inevitable at this point, and I even think if it was done in a good way it could benefit the sport as a whole, not just the elite teams.

But the notion of giving "founding teams" a free pass on relegation for 20 years is a clear sign that the parties involved will take more than their fair share and leave little for the teams that get left behind in their domestic leagues.

deadbq03 said:

---

I'm mixed on this.

I don't disagree that structural changes are probably necessary and maybe even inevitable at this point, and I even think if it was done in a good way it could benefit the sport as a whole, not just the elite teams.

But the notion of giving "founding teams" a free pass on relegation for 20 years is a clear sign that the parties involved will take more than their fair share and leave little for the teams that get left behind in their domestic leagues.

---

They'll never go back to relegation if they cut it out for 20 years.

AustinAg2012 said:

---

This idea's been brewing and resurfacing for two years. I think the real question is: If the league consists of top European clubs, why's Manchester United being considered?

---

Because they've won't the most EPLs in England and three UCLs.
They are easily a top 5 trophy winning club in European history.

EconAg18 said:

---

You must be fun at parties

---

At least I get invited to parties

Beginning of the end

FIFA threatens players that they'd be banned from international competitions including the World Cup if their team joins a Euro Super League.

https://theathletic.com/news/european-super-league-world-cup-football/Tzk0f3BWxsws

I was 100% against the Euro Super League until FIFA declared they were too, now I don't know what to think anymore.

While I know this is 100% in FIFA's own interests for personal gain, I'm glad they did this.

Highly doubt any player is gonna choose playing in a super league over the World Cup. Not to mention any FIFA organized event so that would include Champion's League as well.

I still can't believe the clubs pushing for the new league are trying. I feel like it has 100% fan disapproval.

I hate the idea of a super league, but I think clubs could easily call FIFA's bluff and hold top players hostage in this situation. Think about how much those guys make at their super clubs and whether or not they'd be willing to hold out or take a pay cut to go to a smaller club so they could go to the cup. Many would, to be sure, but I think a surprising number would take the big pay day.

heddleston said:

---

I hate the idea of a super league, but I think clubs could easily call FIFA's bluff and hold top players hostage in this situation. Think about how much those guys make at their super clubs and whether or not they'd be willing to hold out or take a pay cut to go to a smaller club so they could go to the cup. Many would, to be sure, but I think a surprising number would take the big pay day.

---

Not to cross streams/threads but if you're right, then that is a very good indicator that MLS could, in fact, become a top league. If a surprising number would be ready to take a massive pay day over CL, WC, etc. then they'd do the same to play in US for LAFC as they would for Barcelona in this Super League...assuming LAFC could match the offer which in theory they could at some point in the future with the right financial backing and desire.

But I don't think that happens or that's true. Because that surprising number can't be 10, 20, or even 30% of the elite players in the world. It has to be 50% or higher or else the whole selling point of the European Super League, watching elite teams with elite players, is gone. And the TV rights and advertising dollars that are needed to fund the effort are significantly reduced to the point that clubs can't make a profit and offer these crazy salaries. Because just like today, the elite clubs can't afford to pay today's salaries without crazy TV and advertising dollars.

I think if the finances weren't there, these elite clubs wouldn't be interested.

For lack of a better analogy, this is similar to all the conference realignments we've had over the past 3 decades in college football. Teams were willing to let go of tradition to improve their finances.

When you consolidate quality, you're going to have better finances - at the expense of the teams that get left behind.

Personally, I think anyone who would stop watching over this already has one foot out the door over other issues that have already exposed the myth of the local club (i.e. foreign/corporate ownership, etc). Which is why I said earlier that I think structural changes are probably needed. The ship has already sailed IMO. This isn't the same sport it used to be.

I worry that FIFA is putting up the bat signal that they need to be paid off to make this happen.

I think this isn't a fight so much between FIFA and the clubs but FIFA and UEFA. FIFA is telling UEFA that if they do this they will lose the EUROs, all the qualifying games, Nations League, etc. That's the International hook. The WC is just the cherry on top. Everything else is the UEFA money machine. And these clubs wouldn't be talking so loudly about a super league if UEFA wasn't on board.

But leaving the SWC for the Big 12 or leaving the Big 12 for the Big 10 didn't exclude you from the national championship. Moreover, it most cases it actually made your team more attractive for talent not less. The likelihood of it not working out financially was relatively small (though not impossible).

But if FIFA were to ban all players from competing in effectively any of the major national tournaments (I think the threat of banning players from the CL because this ESL would effectively become the CL), the finances could be, in theory, at risk. Because, yeah...I completely agree that these 18 clubs that would make up the ESL are only doing this for money and they definitely think that the finances are there to do it. And they're probably right...IF the can field the top talent in the world.

Or to put it another way, if these 18 clubs did an analysis on whether the finances would make sense IF they lost 1/2 of the world class players on their team to clubs that were outside the 18, do you think they'd still come to the same decision that the finances made sense? What if they lost 3/4 of their world class talent? All of their world class talent? Surely there's some point where the power of the brand/club can't compensate for the fact that it has no world class talent and, moreover, doesn't have a realistic path to attract that talent.

I have no idea what will happen if FIFA follows through with this threat but I do think it's potentially fascinating if they do. I'm not very familiar with the whole NFL/USFL era but it feels more similar to that. Does Pulisic decide to stay at Chelsea and never play for the US again? Or does he go play for Everton so that he can? What about McKinnie? Dest?