A 64 Team Champions League.... where do you stand?

http://www.independent.co.uk/sport/...pions-league-from-32-to-64-teams-8363942.html

Uefa are considering a proposal to double the number of teams in the Champions League from 32 to 64 teams.

The idea would see European football's governing body scrap the Europa League.

"We're discussing it. We will make a decision in 2014. Nothing is decided yet," Uefa president Michel Platini told French newspaper Ouest-France.

The proposal is likely to be met with dismay, with many feeling the Champions League has already been diluted with the inclusion of teams from uncompetitive divisions in Europe and others that have finished as low as fourth in their domestic division. A league of champions it certainly isn't.

An extension to a 64 team competition could see as many as seven teams qualify from England, rather than the current four.

Uefa are looking at changing the existing format of European competitions, with an implementation date of 2015 for any alterations.

The amount of money generated by the Champions League is a motivating factor while the Europa League, which was re-branded from the Uefa Cup, has struggled to hold the attention enjoyed by it's sister competition.

"There is an ongoing debate to determine what form the European competitions will have between 2015 and 2018," added Platini.

The Europa League, which Fulham reached the final of in it's first year, has been criticised for the number of games involved. The current format sees a group stage leading to a final 32, meaning a marathon 14 matches to reach the final.

With many teams having to come through qualifying stages just to make the competition, as Fulham did, that number can increase. The west Londoners played an extra 19 games during the 2009/10 season.

Another proposal understood to be under consideration is offering a place in the Champions League as a prize for winning the Europa League. The prize may encourage teams, many of which rest players for Europa League matches, to take the competition more seriously.

Also under review is the current format which sees teams finishing third in the Champions League group stage dropping into the Europa League's last-32. The practice has often been criticised for devaluing the Europa League as well as being unfair on those that have battled through the group stages to make the later round.

Change has always been embraced by the European competitions, with the Champions League, then called the European Cup, at first involving just 16 teams. Group stages have since been introduced while at one stage the format involved two group phases, although it was scrapped after proving unpopular.

There have been rumours that a break-away competition involving Europe's top teams could be created, although Platini does not foresee such a move.

"It's a question that is regularly brought up," he said.

"I can't see how it could work outside the Uefa framework. Who will referee them? In what stadiums will they play?"

 

I think it would be a bad idea and widen the gap between the top 7-8 teams and the rest of the PL.

 

I'm confused about it.

Europa is clearly devalued by the introduction of Champs league failures after the groups, but it is also a comp I believe shouldn't exist because as a comp for runners up of the runners up of each domestic league (at best), it has no inherent value to begin with. I mean, what's the point? Adding a Champs league place for the winner is all well and good, but we shouldn't have about 8 billion teams (possible hyperbole) going for it.

I think an actual league for champions is a nice idea, with every winner of the top European domestic leagues + 1 domestic cup going into it for the year (would increase likelihood of top teams fielding strong personnel in the FA cup). But there's only interest in the champions league because of the cup format.

7 teams or so from each country in a champions league could work, but I just have reservations about it still having reference to "champions". Teams like Sunderland who have spent masses in transfer windows and not made the top 7 would be under greater pressure to sack the manager, so it'll only ramp up the cut-throat nature of football...

 

i'm all for it as it as otherwise the teams in it will always have the monopoly they have now.

 

Prem teams already complaining about too many games and travel so for me this is a no go. A Championship league should be exactly that, for CHAMPIONS not also rans.

 

Terrible idea, as i have said in the past all that needs to be done is: (A) Give the winner of the Europa League Winner a CL Place and (B) Change the schedule, so that the europa games can be played on tuesdays and the CL games can be played on wednesdays and thursdays. With these two changes the teams in the europa have an extra incentive to be in the competition (rather than treating it as a burden) and will not field weakened sides because of the prize on offer. This sould then lead to better games, and if we need any more reason to support this idea just look at the financial rewards currently on offer for winning the Europa League. The second idea makes more sense as we all know the teams in the CL have the squads to cope with playing 2 games in 3 days where as the teams in the Europa (from our point of view lol) dont. Simples

 

Shocking idea but I'd only allow the champions of each league to compete anyway so I'm pretty biased. They say the wealth gets spread better but I'd also cap wages and restrict transfer budgets to keep a level playing field. I can see why American sports have a draft personally.

I'd also not allow CL drop outs in the Europa. Its like they are saying "well you've missed on the good one, but we have this ****ty one you can drop into".

 

I doubt this would happen, Imagine how much money Uefa would have to give out

 

That's pretty much my entire opinion on the matter.

If they were to go through with this (don't think they will), they should rebrand it.

European Super League (merging of the current CL and EL)
Champions Cup (a seeded straight knockout competition between the league winners of Europe)

It'd bring extra prestige to winning your league and you wouldn't have the joke that is a 6th placed club being in the 'Champions' League.

 

I actually agree that the Europa League is a 2nd rate competition compared to the Champions League - I think having a single team as the undisputed Champions of Europe is a good idea.

 

Forget messing with the Champions League. I reckon they should change the Europa League back into the UEFA Cup. Knockout competition, and if a team decides they can't be bothered with it they can throw away their involvement in one 2 legged tie and boom, they can concentrate on the league. Plus it's more cut-throat. More upsets can happen as one bad leg could spell the end, whereas currently one bad game isn't the end of the world in the group phase. It was a better competition when there was more riding on a game. And I would also stop Champions League teams entering. We could have a shot at winning the Europa League this year if it wasn't for moneybags like Man City spoiling things by stepping on our territory!

 

I agree completely.

Keep the failed CL teams out of the Europa League, and making it a knockout tournament would generate a lot more interest.

Platini would never listen to such sound logic though. Airconditioned stadiums in the desert during summer anyone?

 

And lots of dirham's changing hands.

 

The Europa League needs to be moved to a Tuesday night and put the CL on Wednesday and Thursday. The CL clubs get enough money from the more prestigious competition to build a larger squad to cope with the demand.

A place in the following seasons CL for the EL winners is an obvious incentive. Of course the losing CL teams being allowed entry needs to be stopped as its another opportunity for the bigger clubs to steal from the smaller ones.

Wouldn't harm putting a little extra money in the EL pot either, even if this is taken from the pot that the CL generates.