European Superleague

[100% Celt]

Announced last night that there will be a breakaway European Superleague consisting of Real Madrid, Barcelona, Atletico, Inter, Juventus, Milan, Liverpool, United, City, Spurs, Arsenal, Chelsea and three others with a further five to come in later.

Personally I'll believe it when I see it but I definitely don't want it (even though my club will be in it). Sport has to have history and rivalry and if it doesn't, it's dead.

[jdrocko]

This is going to be the topic for the next months in Europe...while something similar has already happened for basketball (Euroleague have a similar structure) with no real retaliation from national leagues apart than some threatening proclaim, I expect this to be a bigger deal since business is much more relevant. At the end of the day, I think UEFA could be the big loser since Champions League would be stripped of most of its top tier talent (especially if PSG, Bayern and Borussia Dortmund could still join it)

[100% Celt]

This is going to be the topic for the next months in Europe...while something similar has already happened for basketball (Euroleague have a similar structure) with no real retaliation from national leagues apart than some threatening proclaim, I expect this to be a bigger deal since business is much more relevant. At the end of the day, I think UEFA could be the big loser since Champions League would be stripped of most of its top tier talent (especially if PSG, Bayern and Borussia Dortmund could still join it)

There's a key difference though. To have a league approaching anything near the quality of the NBA, the world's premier basketball tournament, European clubs had to come together to form it. They don't need that in soccer where the clubs involved in this already come from the three best leagues on the globe. There's also not the long history of intense local rivalry in basketball in Europe as there is in soccer. Plus the idea of teams competing across vast continental distances as part of a "domestic" league is not alien to basketball because of the NBA whereas it is in soccer. Bluntly, beating City, Liverpool, Real Madrid means very little to me and fellow Interisti. Beating Atalanta, Roma, Lazio, Napoli etc. is where it's at.

[jdrocko]

There's a key difference though. To have a league approaching anything near the quality of the NBA, the world's premier basketball tournament, European clubs had to come together to form it. They don't need that in soccer where the clubs involved in this already come from the three best leagues on the globe. There's also not the long history of intense local rivalry in basketball in Europe as there is in soccer. Plus the idea of teams competing across vast continental distances as part of a "domestic" league is not alien to basketball because of the NBA whereas it is in soccer. Bluntly, beating City, Liverpool, Real Madrid means very little to me and fellow Interisti. Beating Atalanta, Roma, Lazio, Napoli etc. is where it's at.

Nerazzurro speaking here (TP to you!)
I get your points, but at the end of the day I don't see a huge difference between Champions League and Superleague, domestic leagues should stay the same with their huge history of rivalries (apart possibly from more inequality due to increasing disparity of incomes). In the last 20 years only CL winners outside of Superleague expected clubs are Bayern (twice) and Porto and I think "competitive" clubs those could still earn the spot to participate. I'm not 100% sold on this idea but I don't take it as bad as most people here in Italy, I love the fact that sports have huge history, the rivalries and that is something to be protected, but on the other side current business model is not working long term (too many debts) and at least here there are not any munificient ownership such as in the past (there won't be another Moratti family to me)

[100% Celt]

There's a key difference though. To have a league approaching anything near the quality of the NBA, the world's premier basketball tournament, European clubs had to come together to form it. They don't need that in soccer where the clubs involved in this already come from the three best leagues on the globe. There's also not the long history of intense local rivalry in basketball in Europe as there is in soccer. Plus the idea of teams competing across vast continental distances as part of a "domestic" league is not alien to basketball because of the NBA whereas it is in soccer. Bluntly, beating City, Liverpool, Real Madrid means very little to me and fellow Interisti. Beating Atalanta, Roma, Lazio, Napoli etc. is where it's at.

Nerazzurro speaking here (TP to you!)
I get your points, but at the end of the day I don't see a huge difference between Champions League and Superleague, domestic leagues should stay the same with their huge history of rivalries (apart possibly from more inequality due to increasing disparity of incomes). In the last 20 years only CL winners outside of Superleague expected clubs are Bayern (twice) and Porto and I think "competitive" clubs those could still earn the spot to participate. I'm not 100% sold on this idea but I don't take it as bad as most people here in Italy, I love the fact that sports have huge history, the rivalries and that is something to be protected, but on the other side current business model is not working long term (too many debts) and at least here there are not any munificient ownership such as in the past (there won't be another Moratti family to me)

In my opinion, if a Superleague sees the light of day, it will be basically the end of those clubs in their domestic leagues.

Also, the Atalanta fairytale of the last few seasons for example would come to a close. Juventus are looking down the barrel of a gun in terms of potentially not being in the Champions League next year and if Atalanta and Napoli beat them to it, they should be rewarded. It should always be like that. Teams shouldn't get permanent places in elite competitions "just because". We had a long period where we were out of the Champions League and we deserved to be. In numerous ways that makes this season all the better because we've f...i...n...a...l...l...y... returned to where we should be.

The Superleague will be the complete opposite of a meritocracy. Also, the best nights in the curva are never the biggest games but those against local rivals because the people there for those are there for Inter and not the event.

The only way a closed shop works is to adopt the American model but I think the owners are too greedy for that.

Secondo me, i ladri sono dietro a questo progetto perché il monociglio ha paura che non si trova in Champions o nella prossima stagione o in quella dopo.

TP anche per te. Milano siamo noi, e solo noi! ⚫🔵

[PAOBoston]

This is the end of European soccer as we know it. The system was already broken to begin with but still a sad day.

[100% Celt]

This is the end of European soccer as we know it. The system was already broken to begin with but still a sad day.

Quite honestly, I'm pondering whether to do something I never ever thought I would if this league comes into being and ditch the club I've supported all my life to follow one which remains in the domestic league and rooted in its community. Not one which is likely to win honours but one which will always remain local. The one I'm thinking of is still an Italian club, I know who it would be if I decided to go down that route but I'm hoping I'm not forced into a situation where I have to decide.

[ozgod]

So the founding members would be: from England (Manchester United, Manchester City, Liverpool, Chelsea, Arsenal and Tottenham); from Spain (Real Madrid, Barcelona, Atletico Madrid); and Italy (AC Milan, Inter Milan, Juventus). I would imagine at some point, if it looks like it starts to gain momentum, you would see Bayern and Paris St Germain join in as well. Then they would work out a qualifying process for the remaining spots.

It's interesting because of the way that soccer, both at the global and the club level, has been traditionally organized, which is via football associations (UEFA, CONCACAF, etc). It's historically been an open competition with low barriers to entry, where anyone can start up a club and start from the bottom. The promotion and relegation system gives clubs an opportunity to get promoted from the lower leagues to the top flight, so you get fairytales like what happened when Leicester won the PL a few years ago. Also the way the current system works, only the top teams (I think top 4 in England, and maybe top 3 in Spain, Italy, etc) get into the Champions League. I know I'm oversimplifying the process, but the point being that participation in the CL is not guaranteed - e.g. Liverpool, the current champions of England, might not qualify for next year's CL the way things are going for them. So I guess this system gives them, and the other big founding clubs, a permanent seat at the table when it comes to European competition.

So the Super League clubs would continue to play domestically, but would not play in UEFA's regional competition, the Champions League or the Europa League but rather play in their own Super League. Having a permanent Champions League for the founding members where they get to play each other every year, and they get a chance to divide up a much bigger part of the TV revenue pie without having to share it with the smaller clubs, I'm sure the money is significant. Because if I understand it correctly, currently the Champions League TV revenue is split not just with the teams that play in it, but is also used to support the grassroots and the smaller clubs, both in the top leagues as well as the lower leagues. So this would essentially transfer a lot of money from UEFA, and to those smaller clubs, to the Super League clubs.

It will be interesting to see will they have some kind of salary cap to make spending more equitable for this Super League? That's one of the things that has differentiated these clubs from all the rest is their ability to spend ridiculous amounts of money to get players, whether or not they are making money themselves. Usually because they are owned by some rich Arabs (Man City, PSG), rich Americans (Liverpool, Man Utd) or rich Italians (AC Milan, Inter Milan, Juve) that are willing to spend billions, or are backed by local city councils or local governments willing to spend billions (Real Madrid). If this Super League ends up dominated by two or three of the richest because they just outspend everyone, well I don't know how popular that will eventually be.

JP Morgan's a believer, they're backing this to the tune of $6 billion. Maybe they looked back to 1992 when the Premier League was formed, itself the result of a breakaway. It's now the richest soccer league in the world 

[RodyTur10]

The financial differences are becoming bigger and bigger. On one hand domestic competitions in most countries are predictable and boring. They need more parity. However to achieve this, the topclubs should be restrained.
But these national topclubs need the financial advantages from European football to be able to compete with the biggest clubs in Europe. Otherwise it stays like the current Champions League where you basically have the same 5-6 teams in the final stages every year.

So there's a contradiction in creating parity domestically and internationally. The UEFA and national associations have provided no solutions to this issue and by that they have increased economic instability of the football pyramid. As a result the teams which in theory benefit most of the current structure have come up with this idea.

For teams like Real Madrid and Barcelona the Spanish competition (La Liga) doesn't provide enough competition and money to keep up with the huge market that the English Premier League has. In Italy you have Juventus, AC Milan and Internationale who recognize that the Italian Serie A has been fading on the international stage. To stay or become a attraction point for stars they need to have a different structure as they don't have huge resources on a national level.

The English clubs are the most interesting as they have a huge market already. The Premier League is widely succesful. The issue here is the limited places in the Champions League. Because the English league as a whole is booming it also has become more unpredictable (relatively). Therefore Champions League income and exposure is less guaranteed and that's a problem to keep financial stability based on a Champions League budget.

Anyway, it's very interesting to see how this is going to end. I have been expecting such a move for years. It's a result of the way football is evolving globally. The European topclubs are more valuable than leagues themselves.

UEFA and FIFA are criticizing this as selfish and greedy by the big clubs, but they're just worried they can't put that money in their own pockets. They're corrupt institutions. Their statements shouldn't be taken serious.

A competition with:

MANCHESTER CITY
MANCHESTER UNITED
LIVERPOOL
CHELSEA
ARSENAL
TOTTENHAM HOTSPUR
BARCELONA
REAL MADRID
ATLETICO MADRID
SEVILLA
JUVENTUS
INTERNAZIONALE
AC MILAN
AS ROMA
BAYERN MUNICH
BORUSSIA DORTMUND
RB LEIPZIG
PARIS SAINT GERMAIN
AJAX AMSTERDAM
FC PORTO

I can't wait!

[100% Celt]

I don't think Sevilla are big or competitive enough outside of the Europa League for it to work. There's no way you can have Roma without Lazio, the fans just won't wear it. I also doubt they're big or competitive enough either. Leipzig is a Johnny-come-lately. If Red Bull pulled out, they'd go bang. Ajax and Porto for history should be included but they've been left too far behind by the way football has gone. Also there is absolutely no justification for permanent places. This year Napoli and Atalanta could easily push Juventus out of the Champions League and Juventus shouldn't be allowed to leapfrog them just because of history. It would be like the Celtics finishing outside the playoff places but taking Charlotte Hornets' place for example should the Hornets finish high up.

The Premier League financially is booming but the matchday experience is like watching paint dry. The megabucks of the Premier League has completely sanitised support there and there's very little difference these days between going to watch a Premier League match in a stadium and watching it on TV. If you hear raucous applause at the Premier League, you're doing well in terms of atmosphere. Prawn sandwiches and theatre audience-style ambience.   

The only way a non-relegation league can possibly work is by adopting the American model whereby teams are rewarded for finishing low down in order to get them back up. We're very likely to win the league this year and with that comes a lucrative Champions League place but also very substantial prize money too. So we're the best team in the league and we're rewarded with more money than all the rest which we can then invest to improve our squad even more and get further ahead (at least in principle but very often also in practice). That's what's destroyed competitiveness in soccer. That and the Financial Fair Play which means you can only spend in accordance with what you take in. So the richest can spend more and get even further ahead yet again. If somebody fabulously wealthy takes over Sassuolo, Everton or Real Sociedad and wants to spend huge amounts of money on becoming competitive, why shouldn't he be able to? That's how it used to work and that's why there was competition.

[PAOBoston]

The financial differences are becoming bigger and bigger. On one hand domestic competitions in most countries are predictable and boring. They need more parity. However to achieve this, the topclubs should be restrained.
But these national topclubs need the financial advantages from European football to be able to compete with the biggest clubs in Europe. Otherwise it stays like the current Champions League where you basically have the same 5-6 teams in the final stages every year.

So there's a contradiction in creating parity domestically and internationally. The UEFA and national associations have provided no solutions to this issue and by that they have increased economic instability of the football pyramid. As a result the teams which in theory benefit most of the current structure have come up with this idea.

For teams like Real Madrid and Barcelona the Spanish competition (La Liga) doesn't provide enough competition and money to keep up with the huge market that the English Premier League has. In Italy you have Juventus, AC Milan and Internationale who recognize that the Italian Serie A has been fading on the international stage. To stay or become a attraction point for stars they need to have a different structure as they don't have huge resources on a national level.

The English clubs are the most interesting as they have a huge market already. The Premier League is widely succesful. The issue here is the limited places in the Champions League. Because the English league as a whole is booming it also has become more unpredictable (relatively). Therefore Champions League income and exposure is less guaranteed and that's a problem to keep financial stability based on a Champions League budget.

Anyway, it's very interesting to see how this is going to end. I have been expecting such a move for years. It's a result of the way football is evolving globally. The European topclubs are more valuable than leagues themselves.

UEFA and FIFA are criticizing this as selfish and greedy by the big clubs, but they're just worried they can't put that money in their own pockets. They're corrupt institutions. Their statements shouldn't be taken serious.

A competition with:

MANCHESTER CITY
MANCHESTER UNITED
LIVERPOOL
CHELSEA
ARSENAL
TOTTENHAM HOTSPUR
BARCELONA
REAL MADRID
ATLETICO MADRID
SEVILLA
JUVENTUS
INTERNAZIONALE
AC MILAN
AS ROMA
BAYERN MUNICH
BORUSSIA DORTMUND
RB LEIPZIG
PARIS SAINT GERMAIN
AJAX AMSTERDAM
FC PORTO

I can't wait!

The issue with this statement is that it’s the same clubs that have ruined the parity/financial fair play in their domestic leagues. As you mentioned, these clubs are now more valuable than the league itself due the their pockets. It’s in essence destroyed the parity and ability to compete in pretty much most domestic leagues. The way these teams operate has ruined soccer in most countries. FIFA needs to implement financial fair play on these clubs to reign in their spending, not let them create their own league at the expense of everyone else.

[Moranis]

https://thesuperleague.com/press.html

Statement form Superleague, it will have 15 founding members, which can't be relegated, and then will have 5 additional clubs that can rotate.  12 of the 15 have been announced. 

AC Milan, Arsenal, Atlético de Madrid, Chelsea, Barcelona, Internazionale Milano, Juventus, Liverpool, Manchester City, Manchester United, Real Madrid  and Tottenham Hotspur

The other 3 are rumored to be Bayern Munich, Borussia Dortmund and Paris Saint-Germain

Of note, all of the teams will still compete in their national leagues.  This is basically destroying the Champions League, not the the National Leagues.

Competition Format
20 participating clubs with 15 Founding Clubs and a qualifying mechanism for a further five teams to qualify annually based on achievements in the prior season.

Midweek fixtures with all participating clubs continuing to compete in their respective national leagues, preserving the traditional domestic match calendar which remains at the heart of the club game.

An August start with clubs participating in two groups of ten, playing home and away fixtures, with the top three in each group automatically qualifying for the quarter finals. Teams finishing fourth and fifth will then compete in a two-legged play-off for the remaining quarter-final positions. A two-leg knockout format will be used to reach the final at the end of May, which will be staged as a single fixture at a neutral venue.

[Moranis]

They also intend to do this with the Women's teams to further expand and develop women's soccer.

[ozgod]

One of the issues I see with the current situation is that there's really only a handful of clubs in each of Europe's domestic competitions that are chances to win it each year. If you look at La Liga you have to go back to 2003 when Valencia won it, to find the last time there was a champion other than Real Madrid, Barca or Atletico. Same with Germany - Bayern have won it 15 times since 2000, including the last 7 in a row. In Italy, Juve have won the last 9, then AC Milan and then 4 in a row by Inter after the match fixing scandal. It's literally a foregone conclusion even before the season starts. In England there has been more parity, because you have 6 or 7 clubs that can win it each year, though it's probably going to be a long time before we see another run like Leicester made.

These so called super clubs just have so much more money to spend, if you look at Man City, they were trash before Sheikh Mansour bought them in 2008. Since then the club has spent millions and millions in transfer fees to acquire a star studded squad, because there's no salary cap in the PL (they have that Fair Play thing which I think is a farce). Obviously it's worked, the club is now the second most valued club in England after Man United and it generates huge amounts of revenue (though I think profit is another story). Comparing them before to now, there's no comparison. Same goes for PSG when the Qataris bought them. It's all about how much you can spend. Isn't the reason Rafa Benitez left Newcastle is because Mike Ashley is a tightfist and refused to spend money on a better squad?

So in a way I can see why they want to play amongst themselves - that's where all the money is. They need that money to maintain their stature and keep the revenue flowing in, whether it's merchandising, broadcast or gate sales. They go through the motions of the domestic competition pretty much knowing that even though they play different teams each week they're really competing with each other - if Real beat Sociedad then Barca has to as well to keep up. So why go through all that when none of these other teams will make the CL anyway? Just pick who will be playing in advance and do it every week, to maximize the Benjamins (or Euros).

The losers though, will be teams like Leicester, or West Ham, or Atalanta, or Seville, or the top teams of the smaller European leagues, like Ajax, Besiktas, Olympiakos...though I'm sure the Super League will figure out some kind of qualifying process to let them play with the big boys.

[100% Celt]

The issue with this statement is that it’s the same clubs that have ruined the parity/financial fair play in their domestic leagues. As you mentioned, these clubs are now more valuable than the league itself due the their pockets. It’s in essence destroyed the parity and ability to compete in pretty much most domestic leagues. The way these teams operate has ruined soccer in most countries. FIFA needs to implement financial fair play on these clubs to reign in their spending, not let them create their own league at the expense of everyone else.

Sorry, and I mean this respectfully, it's an utter nonsense that financial fair play is the way to go to increase competition. Financial fair play has completely destroyed competition. In fact, a number of the clubs in the list are clubs that have paid the heaviest prices under financial fair play.

Before financial fair play, the longest run of consecutive scudetti was five. Under financial fair play, it's now nine, nearly double. The club which is going almost certainly going to stop that becoming ten is one which has built up slowly, correctly and gotten into the position its now in by using its resources wisely. Inter and Milan were absolutely crippled by financial fair play. Juventus are now swimming in debt because of the Cristiano Ronaldo deal which happened under "financial fair play".

In Germany, prior to financial fair play, nobody had won the Bundesliga more than three times consecutively. And that club was Monchengladbach, not Bayern who had only won it twice in a row. This season it's almost certainly they'll do nine in a row. Three times the previous record.

Everyone jumps on Manchester City but Manchester United are essentially owned by debt. They can't even afford to pay to maintain their stadium properly which is slowly falling into rack and ruin. City spent a lot of money at the start to get up to the level they wanted to be at but since then have been run extremely well and have also absolutely transformed the area of Manchester they now play in from being a desolate wasteground to a thriving area. Manchester United should have had a transfer embargo put on them since the Glazers came in.

Financial fair play is a complete set of balls. Either a system like in American sports and rugby is brought in where everyone has the same limit they can spend to but not over it so it's equal or you don't have it at all. What has been in place in the last ten years in European soccer has been officially enforced inequality. "Your bigger so you have a bigger budget so you can spend more than them who can never hope to catch you up because we won't let them spend the money to do so".

https://thesuperleague.com/press.html

Statement form Superleague, it will have 15 founding members, which can't be relegated, and then will have 5 additional clubs that can rotate.  12 of the 15 have been announced. 

AC Milan, Arsenal, Atlético de Madrid, Chelsea, Barcelona, Internazionale Milano, Juventus, Liverpool, Manchester City, Manchester United, Real Madrid  and Tottenham Hotspur

The other 3 are rumored to be Bayern Munich, Borussia Dortmund and Paris Saint-Germain

Of note, all of the teams will still compete in their national leagues.  This is basically destroying the Champions League, not the the National Leagues.

Competition Format
20 participating clubs with 15 Founding Clubs and a qualifying mechanism for a further five teams to qualify annually based on achievements in the prior season.

Midweek fixtures with all participating clubs continuing to compete in their respective national leagues, preserving the traditional domestic match calendar which remains at the heart of the club game.

An August start with clubs participating in two groups of ten, playing home and away fixtures, with the top three in each group automatically qualifying for the quarter finals. Teams finishing fourth and fifth will then compete in a two-legged play-off for the remaining quarter-final positions. A two-leg knockout format will be used to reach the final at the end of May, which will be staged as a single fixture at a neutral venue.

Domestic leagues cannot possibly run with any credibility with these teams having a foot in and a foot out. Come December, if a Superleague team is doing well in the SL, they will throw reserves/young players at the domestic leagues to keep their players fresh for the SL. If they're doing badly in the SL, they will throw all their best players at the domestic league so they rip it apart.