The European Super League

[Diarcesia]

The fans have a lot more say in German clubs, so it's not a case of some executive owner who doesn't much care for the team over lining their pockets to just make a call.

Red Bull is a lot different from typical Bundesliga teams and Red Bull GmBH will gladly accept that ticket to the ESL.

Red Bull joining the ESL might give it wings to stay afloat.

Inb4 Mercedes sponsors/forms a team there.

[Shofercia]

Red Bull is a lot different from typical Bundesliga teams and Red Bull GmBH will gladly accept that ticket to the ESL.

Red Bull joining the ESL might give it wings to stay afloat.

Inb4 Mercedes sponsors/forms a team there.

Nice pun!

[Garbelia]

My answer to the poll: Neither. They're both corrupt moneyfests, and I'd rather watch National League South football than either of those.

[CoraSpia]

I am no longer a Manchester United fan over this decision.

I will pick a new team after an appropriate period of mourning.

I love the smell of bullshit in the morning. I can't imagine you deciding to stop supporting united

[CoraSpia]

I don't support it. I like the idea that clubs who are not large now could hope to become large, and that there's a very good chance they could manage it. It also seems wrong for Leicester, who are consistently a top-5 finisher in England to miss out on an invitation at the expense of Arsenal, who have floundered in recent years.

Much as I don't support the ESL however the way that the federations are putting pressure on the players strikes a bad tone with me. I don't think that it's at all appropriate to ban the players who are at one of these clubs if it goes ahead from representing their country.

[Bombadil]

I don't support it. I like the idea that clubs who are not large now could hope to become large, and that there's a very good chance they could manage it. It also seems wrong for Leicester, who are consistently a top-5 finisher in England to miss out on an invitation at the expense of Arsenal, who have floundered in recent years.

Much as I don't support the ESL however the way that the federations are putting pressure on the players strikes a bad tone with me. I don't think that it's at all appropriate to ban the players who are at one of these clubs if it goes ahead from representing their country.

Well perhaps..

@FabrizioRomano
UEFA Executive Committee meeting scheduled for today in Montreux.

UEFA, FIFA, PL, Liga, Serie A on the same position: #SuperLeague has been disapproved. No UCL, no domestic leagues for the 12 clubs.

#SuperLeague clubs insist they want to play in the domestic leagues too.

Looks like they'll certainly be banned from domestic and CL..

[Neu California]

Reading this reminds me of the American Open-Wheel split (basically the IRL broke off from CART for a variety of reasons. About a decade later, the IRL, now known as IndyCar, bought out CART, which had gone bankrupt). The split hurt both the old and new series badly, though the older, more expensive one suffered far more, but the survivor (IndyCar) has only just recovered, and is still dealing with old wounds, largely revolving around getting butts in seats.

I really don't see this working out well for either series. It's going to lead to split viewerships and possible declines in said viewership. How long this split can sustain itself, only time will tell.

Edit: on the other hand, I doubt the ESL will have any incident like the 1996 US 500's opening lap crash (a major self-inflicted wound that. In motorsports, if your car can't continue, you're out, yet here, they let several drivers go to backup cars after the opening lap crash)

[CoraSpia]

I don't support it. I like the idea that clubs who are not large now could hope to become large, and that there's a very good chance they could manage it. It also seems wrong for Leicester, who are consistently a top-5 finisher in England to miss out on an invitation at the expense of Arsenal, who have floundered in recent years.

Much as I don't support the ESL however the way that the federations are putting pressure on the players strikes a bad tone with me. I don't think that it's at all appropriate to ban the players who are at one of these clubs if it goes ahead from representing their country.

Well perhaps..

@FabrizioRomano
UEFA Executive Committee meeting scheduled for today in Montreux.

UEFA, FIFA, PL, Liga, Serie A on the same position: #SuperLeague has been disapproved. No UCL, no domestic leagues for the 12 clubs.

#SuperLeague clubs insist they want to play in the domestic leagues too.

Looks like they'll certainly be banned from domestic and CL..

I get that. It's the national teams thing I don't like, it reminds me too much of rugby where various national teams ban players who play abroad. No like, national teams should have the best players who can and want to play in them.

[Bombadil]

Well perhaps..

@FabrizioRomano
UEFA Executive Committee meeting scheduled for today in Montreux.

UEFA, FIFA, PL, Liga, Serie A on the same position: #SuperLeague has been disapproved. No UCL, no domestic leagues for the 12 clubs.

#SuperLeague clubs insist they want to play in the domestic leagues too.

Looks like they'll certainly be banned from domestic and CL..

I get that. It's the national teams thing I don't like, it reminds me too much of rugby where various national teams ban players who play abroad. No like, national teams should have the best players who can and want to play in them.

I don't mind at all, players can choose to play for these clubs in their exclusive little competition or be part of the wider game of football overall. It's ridiculous these teams think they can have their cake - for which they're guaranteed an upfront $3.5B - and eat it in the PL, CL and even the World Cup.

“Founding clubs will receive an amount of €3.5bn solely to support their infrastructure investment plans and to offset the impact of the Covid pandemic… and [solidarity payments] are expected to be in excess of €10bn during the course of the initial commitment period of the clubs.”

So they get, and players earn, all this additional money over and above what they might receive from the leagues and other tournaments.

No.

Either it's an exclusive little club of teams doing whatever they want to do or nothing. It's unfair on every other team. And so players get to choose which system they want to take part in.

[CoraSpia]

I get that. It's the national teams thing I don't like, it reminds me too much of rugby where various national teams ban players who play abroad. No like, national teams should have the best players who can and want to play in them.

I don't mind at all, players can choose to play for these clubs in their exclusive little competition or be part of the wider game of football overall. It's ridiculous these teams think they can have their cake - for which they're guaranteed an upfront $3.5B - and eat it in the PL, CL and even the World Cup.

“Founding clubs will receive an amount of €3.5bn solely to support their infrastructure investment plans and to offset the impact of the Covid pandemic… and [solidarity payments] are expected to be in excess of €10bn during the course of the initial commitment period of the clubs.”

So they get, and players earn, all this additional money over and above what they might receive from the leagues and other tournaments.

No.

Either it's an exclusive little club of teams doing whatever they want to do or nothing. It's unfair on every other team. And so players get to choose which system they want to take part in.

How would the super league negatively impact national teams, and what benefit would these policies have to the world cup and other national team competitions aside from making them a lower quality product?

[Bombadil]

I don't mind at all, players can choose to play for these clubs in their exclusive little competition or be part of the wider game of football overall. It's ridiculous these teams think they can have their cake - for which they're guaranteed an upfront $3.5B - and eat it in the PL, CL and even the World Cup.

“Founding clubs will receive an amount of €3.5bn solely to support their infrastructure investment plans and to offset the impact of the Covid pandemic… and [solidarity payments] are expected to be in excess of €10bn during the course of the initial commitment period of the clubs.”

So they get, and players earn, all this additional money over and above what they might receive from the leagues and other tournaments.

No.

Either it's an exclusive little club of teams doing whatever they want to do or nothing. It's unfair on every other team. And so players get to choose which system they want to take part in.

How would the super league negatively impact national teams, and what benefit would these policies have to the world cup and other national team competitions aside from making them a lower quality product?

None at all, but given Harry Kane has already said he'd leave if he couldn't play in the World Cup, it's an effective bargaining tool in stopping these teams making up their own little competition for themselves.

[CoraSpia]

How would the super league negatively impact national teams, and what benefit would these policies have to the world cup and other national team competitions aside from making them a lower quality product?

None at all, but given Harry Kane has already said he'd leave if he couldn't play in the World Cup, it's an effective bargaining tool in stopping these teams making up their own little competition for themselves.

Putting all the pressure on the players sounds like a very unfair strategy.

[Bombadil]

None at all, but given Harry Kane has already said he'd leave if he couldn't play in the World Cup, it's an effective bargaining tool in stopping these teams making up their own little competition for themselves.

Putting all the pressure on the players sounds like a very unfair strategy.

Blame the owners who devised this little scheme.

[CoraSpia]

Putting all the pressure on the players sounds like a very unfair strategy.

Blame the owners who devised this little scheme.

That's little help to the players who would now be excluded from major competitions and the chance to represent their country. I'm pretty sure they'd be blaming the associations.

[Bombadil]

Blame the owners who devised this little scheme.

That's little help to the players who would now be excluded from major competitions and the chance to represent their country. I'm pretty sure they'd be blaming the associations.

Manchester United have stood down from the European Club Association. And Ed Woodward has stood down from UEFA’s Professional Football Strategy Council.

Juventus, Inter and AC Milan also leave the ECA And Andrea Agnelli has resigned as chairman.

They can choose to go elsewhere than clubs who are completely abandoning every other team for their own means. Plenty of clubs will take them.

12 teams are taking the ball and walking away, it's really up to the players if they go along with them, but they can't take part in competitions organised by those they walked away from.

[Sannyamathland]

This is so very disgusting. The Super League is a disgrace to football. This will have 3 major impacts:
1.The big clubs will get bigger. Clubs like Manchester City, Manchester United, Real Madrid, Barcelona, etc will get bigger and bigger, and this will ruin the very beauty of football. From now on, we won't get to see Ajax beating Real Madrid or Porto winning the UCL. This is really, really bad.
2. The domestic leagues have declared that the clubs playing in ESL will be banned from playing in domestic competitions. This will be the end of football as we knew it. Imagine, a EPL without Liverpool, City or United. This is absolutely fucked up.
3.And who the fuck will think 'bout the players. They are not machines. The footballers are human beings for God's sake. Think 'bout their stress and all that. Please. This is my earnest requests to all the big administrators. PLEASE!!!!

[Tinhampton]

I agree with GVH.

...as long as the clubs continue to be dedicated to the domestic leagues, I don't see an issue. In the Champions League, a club only gets six guaranteed games, and seven games as the teams advance, which they may or may not play. With the new league, the teams get 18 games guaranteed.

...and enough tiredness to last a few weeks, more than likely

[Forsher]

None at all, but given Harry Kane has already said he'd leave if he couldn't play in the World Cup, it's an effective bargaining tool in stopping these teams making up their own little competition for themselves.

Putting all the pressure on the players sounds like a very unfair strategy.

Players matter. But, more to the point, world cups matter. Lionel Messi, for example, you've got to think that he feels the sentiment is that he needs to win something senior with Argentina to not be thought of as... well, perhaps not as a "what could've been" but certainly something between that and a "disappointment". I imagine the pressure of the world cup weighs just as heavily on anyone who plays for England but that's less because they are (or have been) part of a national team with a decent crack at doing so and more because the English press are rabid.

If FIFA thought this proposal would be bad for the world cup, they'd do everything they can to crush it. The way people talk about them, you could imagine Russia getting another world cup in exchange for some poisonous umbrellas. Obviously they wouldn't actually have Perez and co. assassinated but they'd pull out all the stops. I imagine helping players get out from contracts would be a first step.

Someone mentioned the example of rugby... the players tend to go overseas only if (a) they're old and have retired or been retired by other players having become preferred in the national team, or (b) if they've managed to get an exception or confirmation that so long as they're back before such and such, they'll be eligible for the world cup.

Also, rugby players go overseas (usually this means France or Japan) so that they can make enough money to live off. They're basically no better remunerated than many white collar professionals. At least, in the Southern Hemisphere. Soccer players don't have this problem.

[CoraSpia]

Putting all the pressure on the players sounds like a very unfair strategy.

Players matter. But, more to the point, world cups matter. Lionel Messi, for example, you've got to think that he feels the sentiment is that he needs to win something senior with Argentina to not be thought of as... well, perhaps not as a "what could've been" but certainly something between that and a "disappointment". I imagine the pressure of the world cup weighs just as heavily on anyone who plays for England but that's less because they are (or have been) part of a national team with a decent crack at doing so and more because the English press are rabid.

If FIFA thought this proposal would be bad for the world cup, they'd do everything they can to crush it. The way people talk about them, you could imagine Russia getting another world cup in exchange for some poisonous umbrellas. Obviously they wouldn't actually have Perez and co. assassinated but they'd pull out all the stops. I imagine helping players get out from contracts would be a first step.

Someone mentioned the example of rugby... the players tend to go overseas only if (a) they're old and have retired or been retired by other players having become preferred in the national team, or (b) if they've managed to get an exception or confirmation that so long as they're back before such and such, they'll be eligible for the world cup.

Also, rugby players go overseas (usually this means France or Japan) so that they can make enough money to live off. They're basically no better remunerated than many white collar professionals. At least, in the Southern Hemisphere. Soccer players don't have this problem.

I don't think that anybody is calling Messi a 'What could have been,' the jury is still out as to whether he's the GOAT at least in my opinion but he's definitely going to go down as one of the greatest players of all time. Football players don't have this problem to the same extent: in a way I'd say that the best comparison from a purely football perspective would be banning players who move to China from the world cups. Obviously there are some differences, most notably that the standard of football in China is far lower than in the big 5 European leagues, however it still would stink of punishing players simply for wanting a better deal. I don't agree with this whether it's in football, rugby or any other sport: players need to make the best decisions for themselves and have been handed a great opportunity that many of them would not have thought possible before. Their career paths shouldn't be hampered due to the intransigence of both owners and confederations in making them pick between representing their country and playing for one of the biggest clubs.

[Atheara]

While i do think the concept of the ESL to be very interesting, yet again the leagues oppose it because of money, not because they want to save football.

Yeah and FIFA is shit.
Change my mind if you can, just putting up a controversial opinion to piss twitter stans, like i like to do.

[Bombadil]

I don't have a source yet but..

Borussia Dortmund and Bayern Munich will not be part of the ESL

EDIT: Also unsourced, Mourinho sacked.

[Forsher]

You can't have sporting competitions that are run commercially. Rugby understands this and so it forces players to play by their rules. Of course, they're helped enormously by the difference in importance of international matches and domestic seasons in rugby vs soccer.

If you want it to be about sport, it has to be bigger than anyone alive at the present moment. If you let the best All Blacks run willy nilly off to whatever foreign clubs, there won't be an All Blacks team to do this in twenty years. Oh, sure, there'd probably still be a team called the All Blacks but they'd be rubbish since the grassroots foundation would've been gutted and ripped out... and the thing that keeps rugby alive in this country (i.e. the fact the All Blacks win) would've gone.

In the US, they've got things that look like sports but they're not. To a European, they lack to the community feel given they're not clubs but franchises and they can (and do) up sticks. To people round here, they lack the international competition which is what it's all really about (well, aside from League... but that has State of Origin, which is much the same thing though I'm not a fan of either code nor Australian so sort of outside looking in). And it's for those reasons that you get no impetus to change things like the draft system that exist to ensure a quality product, i.e. a competitive one, and handwringing about super teams. If you can't provide a quality product, people aren't going to buy the product.

Soccer was built up on sporting terms. Now, I'll be honest, I'm not sure I agree that club mobility is the best system... from the POV of a player, you're going to get moved out the door if the team wins promotion on the logic you're not X division quality (e.g. Chris Wood with Leicester)... but it seemed to work well for about a hundred years (late 1800s to the late 1900s) before colliding with the commercialism of the 1990s to now. That collision works terribly. There's no stability to the product but there's also absolutely no culture of working to ensure competivity and, indeed, a culture of Big Clubs that Win and Everyone Else (see: this thread). And fans are complacent about it because they think that's what relegation and promotion do (they don't do anything to create competition... they just give incentives for teams to always struggle... at least until things are mathematical, which ironically makes the ends of seasons the least interesting time barring flukes). In reality, though, promotion and relegation just reward the clubs that stay up.

The solution at this point is probably to pit the Leagues against each other, with each League holding player contracts and the clubs within the Leagues being given the players. And similarly to involve salary caps. It'd still get funky with promotion and relegation, but you'd get promoted teams getting the top players the League's newly acquired... so if an established team wanted those players, they'd need to swap them with the promoted clubs.

Academies would also be screwball since the Rich Clubs have, generally, more attractive academies. However, youth football needs closer regulation anyway.

And from the POV of the Broadcasters, they'd just need to invest money in making players more popular than clubs. This is probably something they want to do anyway, since a lot of people can't be arsed watching a match, but they'd love however many minutes of Player X's highlights (e.g. 33 times X made it look like the defender wasn't there).

Owners can be happy by taking ownership stakes in the Leagues (giving them secure and, hopefully increasing, revenues)... which leaves the clubs able to be owned by the fans. So, fans would probably be happy.

There'd be tension but in principle the owners are incentivised to make sure the clubs in their League are the best since that makes their League the better product which means their League gets more money from broadcasters...

The game would, of course, be unrecognisable.

[Sannyamathland]

I don't have a source yet but..

Borussia Dortmund and Bayern Munich will not be part of the ESL

EDIT: Also unsourced, Mourinho sacked.

The Super League thing definitely has something to do with Mourinho's sacking.

[Forsher]

I don't have a source yet but..

Borussia Dortmund and Bayern Munich will not be part of the ESL

EDIT: Also unsourced, Mourinho sacked.

The Super League thing definitely has something to do with Mourinho's sacking.

https://www.bbc.com/sport/football/56799400

[CoraSpia]

You can't have sporting competitions that are run commercially. Rugby understands this and so it forces players to play by their rules. Of course, they're helped enormously by the difference in importance of international matches and domestic seasons in rugby vs soccer.

If you want it to be about sport, it has to be bigger than anyone alive at the present moment. If you let the best All Blacks run willy nilly off to whatever foreign clubs, there won't be an All Blacks team to do this in twenty years. Oh, sure, there'd probably still be a team called the All Blacks but they'd be rubbish since the grassroots foundation would've been gutted and ripped out... and the thing that keeps rugby alive in this country (i.e. the fact the All Blacks win) would've gone.

In the US, they've got things that look like sports but they're not. To a European, they lack to the community feel given they're not clubs but franchises and they can (and do) up sticks. To people round here, they lack the international competition which is what it's all really about (well, aside from League... but that has State of Origin, which is much the same thing though I'm not a fan of either code nor Australian so sort of outside looking in). And it's for those reasons that you get no impetus to change things like the draft system that exist to ensure a quality product, i.e. a competitive one, and handwringing about super teams. If you can't provide a quality product, people aren't going to buy the product.

Soccer was built up on sporting terms. Now, I'll be honest, I'm not sure I agree that club mobility is the best system... from the POV of a player, you're going to get moved out the door if the team wins promotion on the logic you're not X division quality (e.g. Chris Wood with Leicester)... but it seemed to work well for about a hundred years (late 1800s to the late 1900s) before colliding with the commercialism of the 1990s to now. That collision works terribly. There's no stability to the product but there's also absolutely no culture of working to ensure competivity and, indeed, a culture of Big Clubs that Win and Everyone Else (see: this thread). And fans are complacent about it because they think that's what relegation and promotion do (they don't do anything to create competition... they just give incentives for teams to always struggle... at least until things are mathematical, which ironically makes the ends of seasons the least interesting time barring flukes). In reality, though, promotion and relegation just reward the clubs that stay up.

The solution at this point is probably to pit the Leagues against each other, with each League holding player contracts and the clubs within the Leagues being given the players. And similarly to involve salary caps. It'd still get funky with promotion and relegation, but you'd get promoted teams getting the top players the League's newly acquired... so if an established team wanted those players, they'd need to swap them with the promoted clubs.

Academies would also be screwball since the Rich Clubs have, generally, more attractive academies. However, youth football needs closer regulation anyway.

And from the POV of the Broadcasters, they'd just need to invest money in making players more popular than clubs. This is probably something they want to do anyway, since a lot of people can't be arsed watching a match, but they'd love however many minutes of Player X's highlights (e.g. 33 times X made it look like the defender wasn't there).

Owners can be happy by taking ownership stakes in the Leagues (giving them secure and, hopefully increasing, revenues)... which leaves the clubs able to be owned by the fans. So, fans would probably be happy.

There'd be tension but in principle the owners are incentivised to make sure the clubs in their League are the best since that makes their League the better product which means their League gets more money from broadcasters...

The game would, of course, be unrecognisable.

I really do not like this suggestion. Fans want their clubs to sign the best exciting prospects and players often want to play under a particular manager or coach, play in a particular city etc. It would remove any organic factors that football had going for it and replace it with some tightly controlled, rigid parody. I watch American sports because I think that often the game they're playing is more fun, but I don't think we should be going down that route. I guess football is more of a happy medium point between them.