No doubt, there are going to be less-attractive teams, and thus games, added. But this isn't a straight dilution; many good teams, players and games would come into focus as a result. I'm not certain that they'd go with only one team advancing per group, when they could wring out an extra round of the knockout stages, and the revenue therein. The big clubs and UEFA want to milk it for all its worth, so I can't see them leaving 32 games on the table...rational scheduling be damned, that's money to be made.
Well I suppose there would be a small dilution of TV audiences with the additional games to watch but on the whole, I stand jolly well corrected! EDIT - Oh and I wasn't suggesting that only one would progress Schad, just that the big boys would be dead certs.
My proposal: A European version of the FA Cup. 1024 clubs compete in a knockout competition. No seeds. That means it would take 10 games for a team to win it. Call it the European Cup again.
But how do you decide whether a match is attractive and worth watching? Is it just whether you know the teams or the leagues? But then, while you probably know a lot about the French, Spanish, Italian and German leagues, I'm guessing you don't know much about the Swiss or the Danish or Polish or but for all you know, there could be a team out there that plays exciting fast football and so you might realise that it an attractive team to watch. Furthermore, big teams do not necessarily equate to exciting matches. Plenty of matches involving smaller clubs and leagues may be just as, if not more, exciting than matches between bigger teams but by giving them a bigger stage, they can show raise awareness and often people will be pleasantly surprised by a particular club. It's like women's football for example. In the Olympics, a lot of people were given an opportunity to see Team GB in person (and on TV) and considering the way they played against Brazil in particular, a sport which is normally given little coverage, showed the nation that it is capable of great skill and exciting games, and I think a lot of people were pleasantly surprised by that. It's all about awareness, I think 90% of the reason why crowd's at women's football games are so small is a complete lack of awareness among spectators.
Nice idea, but the problem is when Barcelona and United get knocked out at the first round the competition loses its pull somewhat. It's not for me to decide, it's for the viewing public of Europe to decide. It doesn't matter how good a team is to watch, the vast majority of potential viewers won't switch on unless a really big team is playing. This means advertisers will pay less and the competition becomes poorer.
With the FA Cup, my interest goes in about the 4th round once all the interesting and exotic non-league clubs have been knocked out. Unless we're in it, but seeing as we haven't made the 4th round since 2010 that's not likely. If anything, Barca and United getting knocked out in the first round would increase my interest in the cup..
But does the prospect of an Athlone Town v Barcelona final not make your mouth water? I'm going to make this happen with the Football Manager editor.
Oooh, now there's an idea. Give every professional team in Europe the chance to buy in to a lottery for some percentage of their annual revenue. From that pool, draw two teams...who then play winner-takes-all for the pot. Don't tell me that you wouldn't be riveted by a duel between JJK Jyväskylä and Dagenham & Redbridge with 500m on the line.
I entirely agree with this, make the Champions League a competition for the winners of each of Europe's leagues (a bit like it used to be) and everyone else goes into the Europa League. Then with the better teams in it, the attraction of TV revenue can make for a better competition. The idea of the Champion's league, with possibly the 8th placed team of any of Europe's major leagues entering into the competition, makes even more of a mockery of the word 'champion' than it already does.
