German teams are majority fan owned by rule. And that they're not jumping into this should tell Americans a lot about the sporting culture in Europe.JCRiley09 said:
No German or French teams in the "founding" group (yet). I wonder if they would participate as invited clubs or if they'll dig their heels and keep this from getting off the ground.
New European Super League
28,528 Views |
446 Replies |
Last: 4 yr ago by Mathguy64
As a novice soccer fan can someone explain why this is such a bad thing?
You are correct about the culture, but as an FYI, there are major exceptions to the 50+1 rule. Some were grandfathered in as old company clubs (Wolfsburg for Volkswagen; Leverkusen for Bayer), others loopholed the system by funneling money into 5th tier sides and getting them promoted (Leipzig, Hoffenheim). But the 50+1 culture is why all those teams, especially the last two are quite hated in Germany.TXAggie2011 said:German teams are majority fan owned by rule. And that they're not jumping into this should tell Americans a lot about the sporting culture in Europe.JCRiley09 said:
No German or French teams in the "founding" group (yet). I wonder if they would participate as invited clubs or if they'll dig their heels and keep this from getting off the ground.
Now UEFA and FIFA are suggesting they won't sanction refs.
I think the perspective I was trying to provide in showing that list is that each of those clubs besides Everton have spent a good amount of time out of the top flight.
My point being that without the Big 6 smaller clubs have more of a shot at staying up each season. The clubs that get promoted are usually expected to go right back down again because they cant afford to dish out as much cash as the top clubs do year over year. Which to my argument would make the top 2 leagues more competitive.
If the super league does end up going through the Big 6 will be virtually unplayable. With an injection of $400M per team its like having the US Mens basketball team playing the other nations at the Olympics. It creates an even wider gap.
My point being that without the Big 6 smaller clubs have more of a shot at staying up each season. The clubs that get promoted are usually expected to go right back down again because they cant afford to dish out as much cash as the top clubs do year over year. Which to my argument would make the top 2 leagues more competitive.
If the super league does end up going through the Big 6 will be virtually unplayable. With an injection of $400M per team its like having the US Mens basketball team playing the other nations at the Olympics. It creates an even wider gap.
You know when you have ice cream because you like it an it is really good? And then you know how you feel if you try and eat a gallon of ice cream in one sitting?Tyrone_The_Tuna said:
As a novice soccer fan can someone explain why this is such a bad thing?
That is the analogy.
This super league would dilute and devalue the current leagues and Cups. I think this was a way for the teams that bring in the big dollars to look at UEFA and say, okay, enough is enough. We are making you a ton of money, not Shaktar Donesk or whatever other teams you pull into Champions League. Start paying us more or you can see what we can do.
Yeah, the whole A&M to the SEC analogy isn't a good one. That presumes that these clubs have some sort of issue where they're being bullied and can't do what's best for them and that's far from the case, we're talking about billion dollar organizations here.
And if they are having cash flow problems, that's akin to the doctor and lawyer couple in your neighborhood that are having financial issues because they bought a couple extra cars, a boat, and two lakehouses.
And if they are having cash flow problems, that's akin to the doctor and lawyer couple in your neighborhood that are having financial issues because they bought a couple extra cars, a boat, and two lakehouses.
I hate the fact that 3/6 clubs have American owners. Obviously there are other clubs in England with American owners not part of this but it's a bad look that you can point at Fenway, Glazers, and Kroenke as the villains behind this.
Imagine if in college football the old blue bloods; USC, Notre Dame, tOSU, Michigan, t.u., OU, Bama, and maybe Clemson or FSU all announced they were going to have their own playoff that they'd automatically qualify for and have a couple at large bids for 2 or so other teams. People would be livid, right? It would effectively kill programs like us or Wisconsin from ever breaking through to that perennial contender status we're striving to hard for and would kill interest in conference play and especially the G5 and below.
14 Premier League clubs meeting tomorrow to discuss future. Would love to see them dock points or relegate the big 6.
The American equivalent would be the top 16 teams in college football breaking away and announcing they're taking 5 of the game weekends and reserving them for games in this new league and having a national championship from those teams. Then the conferences getting together and banning them from competing in the conferences and the NCAA kicking them out and saying they can't compete in March Madness or any other men's or women's championships.
Wonder how this will affect the Champions League this year being that 3 of the 4 teams left are Super League teams. As a Chelsea fan I hope they finish it out but who knows. Whole thing is a mess.
There's definitely a financial disparity in several of the big leagues, but we've also seen examples of how that can be overcome (granted, billionaires help). And even in those leagues, spots 3-8 are often a dogfight at the end of the season between a variety of teams, usually at least one unexpected one each season.
Giving the big clubs a massive, exclusive new revenue stream is going to do anything but help this situation. It's going to reduce interest in these leagues, reduce the money smaller clubs can make, and make the games those big clubs do play a lot less meaningful when they start to use second stringers in games they don't really care about anymore.
Giving the big clubs a massive, exclusive new revenue stream is going to do anything but help this situation. It's going to reduce interest in these leagues, reduce the money smaller clubs can make, and make the games those big clubs do play a lot less meaningful when they start to use second stringers in games they don't really care about anymore.
Aston94 said:You know when you have ice cream because you like it an it is really good? And then you know how you feel if you try and eat a gallon of ice cream in one sitting?Tyrone_The_Tuna said:
As a novice soccer fan can someone explain why this is such a bad thing?
That is the analogy.
This super league would dilute and devalue the current leagues and Cups. I think this was a way for the teams that bring in the big dollars to look at UEFA and say, okay, enough is enough. We are making you a ton of money, not Shaktar Donesk or whatever other teams you pull into Champions League. Start paying us more or you can see what we can do.
Most of the leagues are already 1 or 2 team races. UCL is basically half mediocre teams and the good teams play each other maybe a couple times. Oh yea and the matches are often at the same time so you can only watch one at a time.
Current product is already diluted with a bunch of trash teams. Super league seems like it would be multiple premier matchups every night.
thanks! Makes senseheddleston said:
Imagine if in college football the old blue bloods; USC, Notre Dame, tOSU, Michigan, t.u., OU, Bama, and maybe Clemson or FSU all announced they were going to have their own playoff that they'd automatically qualify for and have a couple at large bids for 2 or so other teams. People would be livid, right? It would effectively kill programs like us or Wisconsin from ever breaking through to that perennial contender status we're striving to hard for and would kill interest in conference play and especially the G5 and below.
There was a poll amongst Bundesliga players taken last year and they overwhelmingly voted that they didn't miss international football at all.
I don't think the players care about this whole deal as much as we do.
I don't think the players care about this whole deal as much as we do.
Another issue is that for the longest time and still currently in some there is NO concept of revenue sharing, salary cap, pooled TV $$, etc., etc. So in Spain Real Madrid and Barca get all the big TV $$ even though they only play each other 2x per season in the league, they cut their own TV deals. So when Real Madrid plays any of the other 18 La Liga clubs, those clubs are just nameless faceless opponent to show up and play. I am as capitalistic and profit driven as anyone but that is not fair or just to the other clubs at all. The EPL was having major discussions with the NFL maybe 10 years ago regarding league structure - revenue sharing, salary cap, etc., etc. I think they did start to share TV $$ equally.
In American terms, this is an issue as the equivalent as the pro level would be that the Cleveland Browns, Pittsburgh Pirates, etc. would have ceased being professional teams at the highest level many years ago. They would still be a professional team, but in some other league or division. Even minor league players as "professionals" if that is what they do for their job, what they do for their living. It does not mean you are playing at the highest level of competition there is.
The Super League is a selfish money grab at the expense of other clubs and without regard to the other clubs. It's a very smarmy UT / t-sip move. Ultimately I think it will break down like this:
Longer term the interesting thing from a psychological and societal perspective is this. Even if not winning the league, the Super League teams - Real Madrid, Barca, Bayern if they join, etc., even if they don't win the league they are used to being a top team in the league, winning many games, collecting trophies, etc., etc. In this new league, teams are no longer going to be winning so many games, yes there will be some that win more and some that win less, but winning % for the top teams is going to decrease dramatically. What impact will that have? As well, they will be outcasts in their own country by not playing in the domestic league and domestic cup competitions (at least at the start).
This would be akin to the "have" of college football just breaking away and leaving still good programs in the dust. Imagine if Bama, Auburn, LSU, A&M joined up with t.u. and OU and just kicked the MS teams, Pig, Texas Tech, OK State, TCU to the curb, and only played amongst themselves and then played against Ohio State and Michigan and Penn State but never Indiana, Minnesota, etc.
In American terms, this is an issue as the equivalent as the pro level would be that the Cleveland Browns, Pittsburgh Pirates, etc. would have ceased being professional teams at the highest level many years ago. They would still be a professional team, but in some other league or division. Even minor league players as "professionals" if that is what they do for their job, what they do for their living. It does not mean you are playing at the highest level of competition there is.
The Super League is a selfish money grab at the expense of other clubs and without regard to the other clubs. It's a very smarmy UT / t-sip move. Ultimately I think it will break down like this:
- There will be a Super League, but it will be completely independent of the domestic leagues, those teams will not play in the domestic leagues or domestic cups. There will be no relegation to or promotion from the domestic leagues. It will be a league based on pay-to-play.
- FIFA will relent and players in the Super League will get to play in the various FIFA competitions.
- UEFA CL will lose much of it's luster but will still continue. Perhaps at some point the UEFA CL winner will play the Super League winner in a Euro Super Cup 2-legged tie.
- The various country Football Associations will eventually relent and let those teams play in the Cup competitions.
Longer term the interesting thing from a psychological and societal perspective is this. Even if not winning the league, the Super League teams - Real Madrid, Barca, Bayern if they join, etc., even if they don't win the league they are used to being a top team in the league, winning many games, collecting trophies, etc., etc. In this new league, teams are no longer going to be winning so many games, yes there will be some that win more and some that win less, but winning % for the top teams is going to decrease dramatically. What impact will that have? As well, they will be outcasts in their own country by not playing in the domestic league and domestic cup competitions (at least at the start).
This would be akin to the "have" of college football just breaking away and leaving still good programs in the dust. Imagine if Bama, Auburn, LSU, A&M joined up with t.u. and OU and just kicked the MS teams, Pig, Texas Tech, OK State, TCU to the curb, and only played amongst themselves and then played against Ohio State and Michigan and Penn State but never Indiana, Minnesota, etc.
https://streamable.com/wvbfog
Video is sparse on details but strong in message. Some discussion elsewhere that this could mean the "Big 6" clubs lose the right to sign foreign players on work permits. Maybe even a complete overhaul of the ownership structure that implements a British version of the German 50+1 rule.
Hopefully they do what is necessary to kill this before it takes flight.
Video is sparse on details but strong in message. Some discussion elsewhere that this could mean the "Big 6" clubs lose the right to sign foreign players on work permits. Maybe even a complete overhaul of the ownership structure that implements a British version of the German 50+1 rule.
Hopefully they do what is necessary to kill this before it takes flight.
The best American analogy I can think of is that this is like the Duke, North Carolina, Kansas, UCLA, Michigan State, Louisville, etc. college basketball programs breaking off to create their own super March Madness and leaving everyone else to go play in the old March Madness. And by the way, Duke and North Carolina probably still want to play in the ACC and Kansas still wants to play in the Big 12.
Sure, it'd guarantee those teams play each other and we get some great games. And yeah, those schools have developed advantages with regards to budgets, facilities, etc. that give them a leg up and we get a lot of blowouts. But it'd completely ruin what's a great thing (March Madness) and institutionalize those advantages that make them even more likely to dominate their conference ("domestic league").
And they wouldn't actually have to "take advantage of their advantages." It turns out Duke can't BS around and make it into March Madness. But in their new system, they'd already be in the Sweet 16 by rule.
Sure, it'd guarantee those teams play each other and we get some great games. And yeah, those schools have developed advantages with regards to budgets, facilities, etc. that give them a leg up and we get a lot of blowouts. But it'd completely ruin what's a great thing (March Madness) and institutionalize those advantages that make them even more likely to dominate their conference ("domestic league").
And they wouldn't actually have to "take advantage of their advantages." It turns out Duke can't BS around and make it into March Madness. But in their new system, they'd already be in the Sweet 16 by rule.
You aren't going to get an argument from me that there needs to be modification of UCL, the leagues and the cups. FA Cup and League Cup are already afterthoughts.TxAG#2011 said:Aston94 said:You know when you have ice cream because you like it an it is really good? And then you know how you feel if you try and eat a gallon of ice cream in one sitting?Tyrone_The_Tuna said:
As a novice soccer fan can someone explain why this is such a bad thing?
That is the analogy.
This super league would dilute and devalue the current leagues and Cups. I think this was a way for the teams that bring in the big dollars to look at UEFA and say, okay, enough is enough. We are making you a ton of money, not Shaktar Donesk or whatever other teams you pull into Champions League. Start paying us more or you can see what we can do.
Most of the leagues are already 1 or 2 team races. UCL is basically half mediocre teams and the good teams play each other maybe a couple times. Oh yea and the matches are often at the same time so you can only watch one at a time.
Current product is already diluted with a bunch of trash teams. Super league seems like it would be multiple premier matchups every night.
I think the big clubs were just tired of trying to get UEFA and the EPL, FA, etc. to see the issues which exist, and went scorched earth. I have a feeling that in the end what will happen is we will get a revised UCL that will have spots reserved for teams with a long term win coefficient (the blue bloods who are normally really good who are forming the super league) and put more money in their pockets.
The FA Cup is not an afterthought, but the League Cup should cease to exist.
Yeah. If they want to continue with the League Cup, it should become what it was originally conceived to be: a loser's bracket tournament for teams eliminated from the FA Cup.
Do they really have a legal system that would allow one work permit policy for one set of entities and a different one for another group doing the same thing?Kampfers said:
https://streamable.com/wvbfog
Video is sparse on details but strong in message. Some discussion elsewhere that this could mean the "Big 6" clubs lose the right to sign foreign players on work permits. Maybe even a complete overhaul of the ownership structure that implements a British version of the German 50+1 rule.
Hopefully they do what is necessary to kill this before it takes flight.
Well, ok, now he's notfig96 said:Jose Mourinho is one of the highest paid managers in the world.Verne Lundquist said:
We bought ourselves a great coach with all the money we have got since the move happened. Hopefully we can get ourselves an SEC championship then National Championship.
The same can happen with Tottenham and Arsenal
Teams like Tottenham and Arsenal aren't having issues because they're hurting for cash.
Someone is about to give.
4 of our 11 starters are about to get stopped from playing in the World Cup.
I bet it's 8 out of 11 for England.
4 of our 11 starters are about to get stopped from playing in the World Cup.
I bet it's 8 out of 11 for England.
Actually, not quite accurate. The qualifying discussion is coming from UEFA, not CONCACAF, so it's referring to Euro qualifying and not the US squad. This would affect England, Germany, Spain, etc., but not the USMNT.Look guys... said:
Someone is about to give.
4 of our 11 starters are about to get stopped from playing in the World Cup.
I bet it's 8 out of 11 for England.
I'm not aware of any public stance from CONCACAF, which makes sense as they aren't really affected by this for the most part.
My best guess is possibly, they don't have the same principle of judicial review that we do and by and large what parliament says is constitutional.JJxvi said:Do they really have a legal system that would allow one work permit policy for one set of entities and a different one for another group doing the same thing?Kampfers said:
https://streamable.com/wvbfog
Video is sparse on details but strong in message. Some discussion elsewhere that this could mean the "Big 6" clubs lose the right to sign foreign players on work permits. Maybe even a complete overhaul of the ownership structure that implements a British version of the German 50+1 rule.
Hopefully they do what is necessary to kill this before it takes flight.
Reality is that I'm not a scholar of British law and so I don't know.
FIFA has briefly stated they are supporting UEFA in all this right now. Thus that includes the World Cupfig96 said:Actually, not quite accurate. The qualifying discussion is coming from UEFA, not CONCACAF, so it's referring to Euro qualifying and not the US squad. This would affect England, Germany, Spain, etc., but not the USMNT.Look guys... said:
Someone is about to give.
4 of our 11 starters are about to get stopped from playing in the World Cup.
I bet it's 8 out of 11 for England.
I'm not aware of any public stance from CONCACAF, which makes sense as they aren't really affected by this for the most part.
https://www.cbssports.com/soccer/news/super-league-uefa-exco-member-says-real-madrid-chelsea-man-city-will-be-removed-from-champions-league-semis/
UEFA executive committee member saying that Man City, Chelsea, and Real Madrid will be kicked out of this years Champions League on Friday.
Congrats PSG?
UEFA executive committee member saying that Man City, Chelsea, and Real Madrid will be kicked out of this years Champions League on Friday.
Congrats PSG?
I think those are still two different things.wangus12 said:FIFA has briefly stated they are supporting UEFA in all this right now. Thus that includes the World Cupfig96 said:Actually, not quite accurate. The qualifying discussion is coming from UEFA, not CONCACAF, so it's referring to Euro qualifying and not the US squad. This would affect England, Germany, Spain, etc., but not the USMNT.Look guys... said:
Someone is about to give.
4 of our 11 starters are about to get stopped from playing in the World Cup.
I bet it's 8 out of 11 for England.
I'm not aware of any public stance from CONCACAF, which makes sense as they aren't really affected by this for the most part.
FIFA is supporting what UEFA is doing, but FIFA doesn't determine who's eligible for the World Cup from each region. That decision is still up to the regional bodies, in this case UEFA and CONCACAF.
And I absolutely could be wrong, that's just my take.
I think its likely to be a pretty sticky situation to do that. Its not like the FA has some exclusive right to arbitrarily decided football things within the boundaries of the UK. There are also 3 other associations in the country. What stops the big 6 from leaving the FA altogether. If the Home Office can then decided that the 6 unaffiliated clubs should be punished through the work permit systems, how can they do that and decide that these 6 clubs should arbitrarily be treated differently than clubs that are members of the FA, Scottish FA, Welsh FA, etc.Kampfers said:My best guess is possibly, they don't have the same principle of judicial review that we do and by and large what parliament says is constitutional.JJxvi said:Do they really have a legal system that would allow one work permit policy for one set of entities and a different one for another group doing the same thing?Kampfers said:
https://streamable.com/wvbfog
Video is sparse on details but strong in message. Some discussion elsewhere that this could mean the "Big 6" clubs lose the right to sign foreign players on work permits. Maybe even a complete overhaul of the ownership structure that implements a British version of the German 50+1 rule.
Hopefully they do what is necessary to kill this before it takes flight.
Reality is that I'm not a scholar of British law and so I don't know.
The *******s finally won it lolLegal Custodian said:
https://www.cbssports.com/soccer/news/super-league-uefa-exco-member-says-real-madrid-chelsea-man-city-will-be-removed-from-champions-league-semis/
UEFA executive committee member saying that Man City, Chelsea, and Real Madrid will be kicked out of this years Champions League on Friday.
Congrats PSG?
Featured Stories
See All
10:14
1d ago
7.4k
Zach Clemence leads Texas A&M's 3-point barrage vs. South Carolina
by Olin Buchanan
5 Thoughts: Texas A&M 92, South Carolina 69
by Luke Evangelist
5:03
1d ago
1.8k
Game Highlights: Texas A&M 92, South Carolina 69
by Reece Nygren
LIVE: Texas A&M at Missouri
by Justin Paez