Champions League 2015/16

[elltrev]

what's the difference?

That's kind of my point - there shouldn't really be any difference, but everyone behaves as if there is!

 

[milo]

Really disappointed Atletico failed to beat Real in the CL final for the second time. Don't think they will ever win the CL now. For all their good record over Real, Atletico just lack the mental strength to win the CL.

CL has become so predictable and boring with only the big and rich clubs winning it. Small clubs like Atletico(twice), Valencia(twice) and Bayer Leverkusen tried but failed to stop the big clubs winning again and again. Porto under Mourinho in 2004 was the only small club to win the CL since it was started in 1993.

The old European Cup was more open, unpredictable and exciting. Remember the small and unfancied clubs like Nottingham Forest, Aston Villa, Steaua Bucharest, Porto, PSV Eindhoven, Red Star Belgrade and Marseille won it just before the CL was started.

Nowdays, it seems small clubs have no chance whatsover to win the CL.

You're forgetting Chelsea and Liverpool

 

[Spurs7891]

You're forgetting Chelsea and Liverpool

Well, atleast Chelsea are rich with money while Liverpool are rich with history having won the EC/CL 5 times in total. So, only the big and rich clubs are allowed to win the CL it seems !

 

[milo]

Well, atleast Chelsea are rich with money while Liverpool are rich with history having won the EC/CL 5 times in total. So, only the big and rich clubs are allowed to win the CL it seems !

 

[milo]

In all seriousness though, this should not come as a surprise to you. The qualifying rounds, seeding and group phase are all designed to make it as easy as possible for the big teams to reach the knock out rounds and guarantee their income.

 

[Baleforce]

Really disappointed Atletico failed to beat Real in the CL final for the second time. Don't think they will ever win the CL now. For all their good record over Real, Atletico just lack the mental strength to win the CL.

CL has become so predictable and boring with only the big and rich clubs winning it. Small clubs like Atletico(twice), Valencia(twice) and Bayer Leverkusen tried but failed to stop the big clubs winning again and again. Porto under Mourinho in 2004 was the only small club to win the CL since it was started in 1993.

The old European Cup was more open, unpredictable and exciting. Remember the small and unfancied clubs like Nottingham Forest, Aston Villa, Steaua Bucharest, Porto, PSV Eindhoven, Red Star Belgrade and Marseille won it just before the CL was started.

Nowdays, it seems small clubs have no chance whatsover to win the CL.

I don't believe that's a bad thing, professional sport should be predictable, it's a sign that organisations know what they are doing rather than just "getting lucky". Mercedes are dominating F1 because they have built a better car, where is the incentive to do that if it doesn't increase the chances of a pay off?

Madrid haven't won it twice in three years because they are "a big club", they've won it because they have bought very well. You can argue the merits of their financial model but don't forget that their spend disparity now is much less than it was in the original Galactico period where they would outspend everybody every season.

Unpredictability is not good for football (or any sport fuelled by money, which is all of them), it would erode investor and sponsorship confidence, why give Barca or United all that money for a shirt deal if they go out after 6 games?

 

[Spur of the moment]

Really disappointed Atletico failed to beat Real in the CL final for the second time. Don't think they will ever win the CL now. For all their good record over Real, Atletico just lack the mental strength to win the CL.

CL has become so predictable and boring with only the big and rich clubs winning it. Small clubs like Atletico(twice), Valencia(twice) and Bayer Leverkusen tried but failed to stop the big clubs winning again and again. Porto under Mourinho in 2004 was the only small club to win the CL since it was started in 1993.

The old European Cup was more open, unpredictable and exciting. Remember the small and unfancied clubs like Nottingham Forest, Aston Villa, Steaua Bucharest, Porto, PSV Eindhoven, Red Star Belgrade and Marseille won it just before the CL was started.

Nowdays, it seems small clubs have no chance whatsover to win the CL.

Nonsense. If video technology had been deployed to decide whether a goal was offside (as it surely will be in the not too distant) they'd now be Champions of Europe.

Fine margins.

 

[milo]

Unpredictability is not good for football (or any sport fuelled by money, which is all of them), it would erode investor and sponsorship confidence, why give Barca or United all that money for a shirt deal if they go out after 6 games?

The sport would be greatly improved if happened.

 

[Baleforce]

The sport would be greatly improved if happened.

I think that's subjective.

It may regress to a state many feel is more enjoyable and competitive in the short term.

Long term I think the game could stagnate, money has enabled new levels of physiological and tactical r&d, the game has progressed rapidly in the last 3 decades, without the incentives and funding I feel we'd lose that.

 

[milo]

I think that's subjective.

It may regress to a state many feel is more enjoyable and competitive in the short term.

Long term I think the game could stagnate, money has enabled new levels of physiological and tactical r&d, the game has progressed rapidly in the last 3 decades, without the incentives and funding I feel we'd lose that.

I would argue that most of the innovative ideas and developments have come from outside of the richest clubs and that all they do is to buy success.

 

[Baleforce]

also...

a lot of funding for youth coaching comes from sponsorship, if the general interest wanes then that goes away

if the money dries up it'll happen from the outside in, transfer fees and wages will be the last to feel the pinch

 

[Baleforce]

I would argue that most of the innovative ideas and developments have come from outside of the richest clubs and that all they do is to buy success.

and what was the incentive of the other clubs to invest here, and how did they afford it?

it's an angle to exploit to help them become big clubs so they can play CL and make more money

 

[milo]

and what was the incentive of the other clubs to invest here, and how did they afford it?

it's an angle to exploit to help them become big clubs so they can play CL and make more money

How many smaller clubs have managed to break into the big clubs and hold their position over the last twenty years? What we have now is a system designed to maintain the status quo and it is succeeding.

 

[Baleforce]

How many smaller clubs have managed to break into the big clubs and hold their position over the last twenty years? What we have now is a system designed to maintain the status quo and it is succeeding.

City, Chelsea, PSG, not through marginal gains obviously.

I think you are advocating dialing things back a little bit. I'm worried about a full scale collapse of the current system taking us back to the 70's.

Equality in football will be more likely served by giving others a hand up rather than dragging people back down, football needs more super rich clubs not less.

 

[milo]

City, Chelsea, PSG, not through marginal gains obviously.

I think you are advocating dialing things back a little bit. I'm worried about a full scale collapse of the current system taking us back to the 70's.

Equality in football will be more likely served by giving others a hand up rather than dragging people back down, football needs more super rich clubs not less.

What I want will never happen and if it did, the super rich clubs would breakaway. So I accept that we are stuck with the current model and that my club will be denied a chance to ever compete.

 

[Baleforce]

What I want will never happen and if it did, the super rich clubs would breakaway. So I accept that we are stuck with the current model and that my club will be denied a chance to ever compete.

I'm still hopeful we can haul ourselves in

the are certainly still trying, they wouldn't be investing so much in the infrastructure if they didn't think it would pay off long term

 

[Baleforce]

also, future football growth relies more on attracting new fans than it does on appeasing existing customers

it certainly appears that global tv audiences want more of the same at the minute

 

[Rorschach]

How good is that Carrasco? What a player! Very good game that turned out to be far more entertaining than I expected. But the best man on the pitch for me was Mark Clattenburg! Just brilliant refereeing throughout the game. Only one slight mistake when Carrasco was held back, and he stopped the game and gave a booking
Could have played advantage. Thought he was absolutely brilliant.

Have to agree. Had a very good game. Was just saying to the brother before the match that this game would be an absolute nightmare to ref, but he did well.

 

[milo]

also, future football growth relies more on attracting new fans than it does on appeasing existing customers

it certainly appears that global tv audiences want more of the same at the minute

I would agree that the current set up of the Champions League has been to maximise TV income and please broadcasters.

The competition most in need of change is the Europa League because at the moment it looks designed to hold back clubs in the chasing pack.

 

[Baleforce]

I would agree that the current set up of the Champions League has been to maximise TV income and please broadcasters.

The competition most in need of change is the Europa League because at the moment it looks designed to hold back clubs in the chasing pack.

I think that's more likely a by product of the monetisation than a concerted effort, although it's certainly a factor