2021/2022 Champions League: Not the Super League

Morgan's Magic Snowplow

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 2, 2006
22,704
Philadelphia
"Historically successful" is a bit of a misnomer.

This part of the proposal has been on the table for a while. It gives two places to the teams with the highest UEFA club coefficients (calculated from the previous five seasons) who didn't otherwise qualify and who finished higher than any other non-qualifying club in their league table.

Realistically, this is a concession to big clubs - especially in England - to try to disincentivize them from supporting the Super League. And its probably a concession that needs to be made. The more dominant the Premier League becomes, the less and less sense it makes for the bigger clubs to support a CL model that only gives spots to four of them.
 

Gunfighter 09

wants to be caribou ken
Moderator
SoSH Member
Jul 31, 2005
8,551
KPWT
So, if this applied this year, the new rule would take some of the drama out of the 4th place races in Italy & England. The loser of Juve / Roma would get in, and then, in order - ManU, Spurs & Arsenal would get in if they didn't get 4th.

I think what this really hurts is the domestic cups. Getting fall / winter wins in whatever European tournament becomes so much more important than a League cup / early FA Cup match because of the need to keep the Coefficient high.



https://www.uefa.com/nationalassociations/uefarankings/club/#/yr/2022
 

Pesky Pole

Well-Known Member
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Jul 31, 2001
2,658
Phoenixville, PA
This smells like a Super League compromise. I’m sure there won’t be any controversy (or bribes) when they pick the two teams out of the three historical teams that wouldn’t qualify in any given year.

Edit: now I see the coefficients thing.
 

swiftaw

Member
SoSH Member
Jan 31, 2009
3,490
This smells like a Super League compromise. I’m sure there won’t be any controversy (or bribes) when they pick the two teams out of the three historical teams that wouldn’t qualify in any given year.

Edit: now I see the coefficients thing.
My understanding is it is entirely based on club coefficient, which is a mathematical formula, so there shouldn’t be any picking.
 

teddykgb

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 16, 2005
11,425
Chelmsford, MA
This smells like a Super League compromise. I’m sure there won’t be any controversy (or bribes) when they pick the two teams out of the three historical teams that wouldn’t qualify in any given year.

Edit: now I see the coefficients thing.
It’s still shitty. Qualify or don’t. There are already 4 fucking spots in England
 

swiftaw

Member
SoSH Member
Jan 31, 2009
3,490
I would be more okay with it if they make one tweak, namely if you qualify for the CL via one of these two "historically successful" spots, you dont earn any coefficient points for that season (i.e. just like you wouldn't earn any if you didn't qualify at all). That way, a team can't continually qualify only be being "historically successful".
 

Gunfighter 09

wants to be caribou ken
Moderator
SoSH Member
Jul 31, 2005
8,551
KPWT
Who is losing a spot for these extra two entries?


I would be more okay with it if they make one tweak, namely if you qualify for the CL via one of these two "historically successful" spots, you dont earn any coefficient points for that season (i.e. just like you wouldn't earn any if you didn't qualify at all). That way, a team can't continually qualify only be being "historically successful".
I don't like this, but agree that there should be some disadvantage to getting in the UCL through past accomplishments. Perhaps a good penalty would be automatic placement in pot 4 for the draw, regardless of coefficient.
 

Morgan's Magic Snowplow

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 2, 2006
22,704
Philadelphia
It’s still shitty. Qualify or don’t. There are already 4 fucking spots in England
Easy to say for a supporter of a state sponsored club that will spend enough to land in the top four every year.

I don't really see the issue. It hasn't been a competition among Champions for a long time, its always just been about developing different formulae for qualifying that balance the imperative to spread the competition among national associations and the competing imperative to have the best teams involved. The structure of the competition and the formula for qualification has been changed over and over and this is just another iteration of that process.
 

Morgan's Magic Snowplow

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 2, 2006
22,704
Philadelphia
Who's spots are these extra two slots taking?
They are expanding the competition by four slots, two based on club coefficient and two are going to other national associations.

The much more consequential and frankly problematic change is the abandonment of the group stage for a different "Swiss model" in which every team is going to play 10 games in the fall. That part of the change is going to be a complete nightmare.
 

Gunfighter 09

wants to be caribou ken
Moderator
SoSH Member
Jul 31, 2005
8,551
KPWT
They’re not. The whole competition is being redesigned. No more groups, just one big league of 36 teams using the Swiss system where everyone plays against 10 of them.

Got it. So now there are 4 extra spots total and 2 are going to non qualifiers with high coefficient. I guess I would rather have 2 legacy teams than four more minnows.

And it is really annoying that you quoted my terrible grammar before I could edit.
 

swiftaw

Member
SoSH Member
Jan 31, 2009
3,490
They are expanding the competition by four slots, two based on club coefficient and two are going to other national associations.

The much more consequential and frankly problematic change is the abandonment of the group stage for a different "Swiss model" in which every team is going to play 10 games in the fall. That part of the change is going to be a complete nightmare.
Basically it’s going to mean that the group stage is completely uninteresting, so I bet lots of people only start paying attention once the knock out rounds start.
 

candylandriots

unkempt
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Mar 30, 2004
12,659
Berlin
Easy to say for a supporter of a state sponsored club that will spend enough to land in the top four every year.

I don't really see the issue. It hasn't been a competition among Champions for a long time, its always just been about developing different formulae for qualifying that balance the imperative to spread the competition among national associations and the competing imperative to have the best teams involved. The structure of the competition and the formula for qualification has been changed over and over and this is just another iteration of that process.
I’d say then adjust the number of teams that can qualify from a league.

It’s absurd to think a team could theoretically qualify for the Champions League after finishing 10th in their domestic league or whatever.

I mean, I know Boston sports fans have been spoiled, but the Pats shouldn’t be getting playoff spots based on past glories. Maybe not the perfect analogy, but the idea of divorcing entry from the most coveted place in football from current performance is really just intuitively objectionable.
 

coremiller

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 14, 2005
5,950
This forces bigger clubs to take the Europa League and Conference League more seriously, because clubs can rack up valuable coefficient points in those tournaments.
 

Morgan's Magic Snowplow

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 2, 2006
22,704
Philadelphia
Basically it’s going to mean that the group stage is completely uninteresting, so I bet lots of people only start paying attention once the knock out rounds start.
Yup, there will be a huge number of dead rubber matches, or matches in which at most some seeding in the knockouts is at stake, and the schedule will be absolutely grueling for the participating teams.
 

Morgan's Magic Snowplow

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 2, 2006
22,704
Philadelphia
I’d say then adjust the number of teams that can qualify from a league.

It’s absurd to think a team could theoretically qualify for the Champions League after finishing 10th in their domestic league or whatever.

I mean, I know Boston sports fans have been spoiled, but the Pats shouldn’t be getting playoff spots based on past glories. Maybe not the perfect analogy, but the idea of divorcing entry from the most coveted place in football from current performance is really just intuitively objectionable.
That can't happen. There is a provision where you can't "leapfrog" another team in your domestic league if you finish behind them. So you can only get one of the spots if you have one of the two highest club coefficients among non-qualifiers AND there is no other non-qualifying team ahead of you in the league table. Basically, you have to either finish 5th or finish 6th in a situation where the 5th place team is the other club with the highest coefficient.

My understanding is that there is a lot of opposition to giving the biggest associations five spots among the smaller associations. So this is a compromise solution in which they take two spots and make them potentially available to the 5th place teams (or, in a less likely scenario, 6th place team) of those bigger associations. Realistically, its very likely to be teams from England, Italy, or Spain.
 
Last edited:

swiftaw

Member
SoSH Member
Jan 31, 2009
3,490
Yup, there will be a huge number of dead rubber matches, or matches in which at most some seeding in the knockouts is at stake, and the schedule will be absolutely grueling for the participating teams.
Yeah, 10 games instead of 6, but if they aren’t as meaningful I would assume we’ll see a lot of squad rotation.
 

coremiller

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 14, 2005
5,950
Yup, there will be a huge number of dead rubber matches, or matches in which at most some seeding in the knockouts is at stake, and the schedule will be absolutely grueling for the participating teams.
More group stage matches also mean more opportunities to accrue coefficient points with no downside (under the current formula, you gain points for wins and draws but don't lose points for losses), which will tend to make existing CL participants more self-perpetuating.
 

Morgan's Magic Snowplow

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 2, 2006
22,704
Philadelphia
More group stage matches also mean more opportunities to accrue coefficient points with no downside (under the current formula, you gain points for wins and draws but don't lose points for losses), which will tend to make existing CL participants more self-perpetuating.
That's a good point. I wonder whether they plan to tweak the club coefficient formula somehow to reflect the fact that the CL clubs will now play more matches than the CL/ECL clubs.

Yeah, 10 games instead of 6, but if they aren’t as meaningful I would assume we’ll see a lot of squad rotation.
I think that's probably right. Even if you're rotating, however, its still just a huge disruption to have to travel, game plan, and coach these matches.

In a typical season there are something like 17 game weeks between the start of the PL season and Christmas (ie, taking out a couple international breaks). Playing 10 midweek European games plus potentially three League Cup rounds means very few weeks in which you're not playing a midweek fixture. Its just too much football.
 
Last edited:

swiftaw

Member
SoSH Member
Jan 31, 2009
3,490
That can't happen. There is a provision where you can't "leapfrog" another team in your domestic league if you finish behind them. So you can only get one of the spots if you have one of the two highest club coefficients among non-qualifiers AND there is no other non-qualifying team ahead of you in the league table. Basically, you have to either finish 5th or finish 6th in a situation where the 5th place team is the other club with the highest coefficient.

My understanding is that there is a lot of opposition to giving the biggest associations five spots among the smaller associations. So this is a compromise solution in which they take two spots and make them potentially available to the 5th place teams (or, in a less likely scenario, 6th place team) of those bigger associations. Realistically, its very likely to be teams from England, Italy, or Spain.
So basically, at the end of the season, they’ll look at the highest finishing team in each country that didn’t qualify for the CL and whoever has the biggest coefficient will get a CL spot. They’ll then repeat the process (accounting for the newly added team) to fill the second spot.
 

candylandriots

unkempt
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Mar 30, 2004
12,659
Berlin
That can't happen. There is a provision where you can't "leapfrog" another team in your domestic league if you finish behind them. So you can only get one of the spots if you have one of the two highest club coefficients among non-qualifiers AND there is no other non-qualifying team ahead of you in the league table. Basically, you have to either finish 5th or finish 6th in a situation where the 5th place team is the other club with the highest coefficient.

My understanding is that there is a lot of opposition to giving the biggest associations five spots among the smaller associations. So this is a compromise solution in which they take two spots and make them potentially available to the 5th place teams (or, in a less likely scenario, 6th place team) of those bigger associations. Realistically, its very likely to be teams from England, Italy, or Spain.
I actually remember reading that now, but had forgotten that detail. I suppose that if Liverpool came in 10th one year, but ahead of City, Man U, Arsenal, et. al. it could theoretically still qualify, but I suppose the likelihood of that is close enough to zero that I’m fine dropping that point.

Still hate this though :)
 

swiftaw

Member
SoSH Member
Jan 31, 2009
3,490
I actually remember reading that now, but had forgotten that detail. I suppose that if Liverpool came in 10th one year, but ahead of City, Man U, Arsenal, et. al. it could theoretically still qualify, but I suppose the likelihood of that is close enough to zero that I’m fine dropping that point.

Still hate this though :)
No, they couldn’t. You can’t leapfrog any team, so you’d have to be 5th (in England) or 6th if the team in 5th also qualified by having a high coefficient.
 
Last edited:

candylandriots

unkempt
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Mar 30, 2004
12,659
Berlin
No, they couldn’t
I was going from your description above. If, in my example the standings were say:

1.Man City
2. Man U
3. Chelsea
4. Spurs
5. Palace
6. Brentford
7. Norwich
8. Leeds
9. Newcastle
10. Liverpool

and say Liverpool won the Champions League the previous season, wouldn’t they get the “legacy” spot (assuming their coefficient was higher than at least one other non-qualifying team in UEFA)?

I’ll admit the hypothetical is as far-fetched as can be, but trying to understand what I’m not understanding then.

Edit: made my hypothetical conform a bit more to the question I was trying to ask, but I guess I could have done the same thing by essentially turning the standings upside down too.
 

swiftaw

Member
SoSH Member
Jan 31, 2009
3,490
I was going from your description above. If, in my example the standings were say:

1.Man City
2. Man U
3. Chelsea
4. Spurs
5. Palace
6. Brentford
7. Norwich
8. Leeds
9. Newcastle
10. Liverpool

and say Liverpool won the Champions League the previous season, wouldn’t they get the “legacy” spot (assuming their coefficient was higher than at least one other non-qualifying team in UEFA)?

I’ll admit the hypothetical is as far-fetched as can be, but trying to understand what I’m not understanding then.

Edit: made my hypothetical conform a bit more to the question I was trying to ask, but I guess I could have done the same thing by essentially turning the standings upside down too.
Liverpool would qualify automatically as holders. If they didn't win it the previous year, they wouldn't qualify because they can't leapfrog Palace, Brentford, Norwich, Leeds, or Newcastle.
 

swiftaw

Member
SoSH Member
Jan 31, 2009
3,490
I took a quick look at who would've got the 2 spots if the rule had been applied for this year's CL. Using the Club Coefficients at the end of the 20/21 season, these are the highest teams that didn't qualify for the CL, along with their respective league positions and how many teams from their league qualified for the CL:

Arsenal (8th, 4 qualified)
Roma (7th, 4 qualified)
Spurs (7th, 4 qualified)
Lyon (4th, 3 qualified)
Napoli (5th, 4 qualified)
Bayer Leverkusen (6th, 4 qualified)
Basel (2nd, 1 qualified)


Now, under the rules, Arsenal, Roma and Spurs would not get spots because that would require them to leapfrog teams that finished above them in the league (Leicester and West Ham for Arsenal/Spurs, Napoli and Lazio for Roma). Thus Lyon and Napoli would get the 2 'historically successful'' spots.

(Note, however that the CL is expanding by 4 spots and its thought that France would get 1 more automatic spot for their 4ht place team, so Lyon would probably qualify by league position under the new rules. If that was the case, the other 'historically successful' spot would of the Basel, since Leverkusen can't leapfrog Frankfurt who finished 5th).
 
Last edited:

candylandriots

unkempt
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Mar 30, 2004
12,659
Berlin
Liverpool would qualify automatically as holders. If they didn't win it the previous year, they wouldn't qualify because they can't leapfrog Palace, Brentford, Norwich, Leeds, or Newcastle.
Ah ok. Sorry that wasn’t getting through. So the only way to get a “legacy” spot in England is basically to finish 5th (with perhaps an exception or two). I appreciate you holding my hand through that!
 

candylandriots

unkempt
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Mar 30, 2004
12,659
Berlin
@swiftaw as much as I wish Union Berlin finished 5th last year, I think you meant Eintracht Frankfurt. Union was 7th - which was still beyond my wildest dreams!
 

Zososoxfan

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 30, 2009
9,424
South of North
Pretty stodgy so far in Villarreal-Bayern. Villa already defending with 10 behind the ball at times, although they've probably had the best chance of the match so far. Looks like Villa will have chances for 1v1s if they can connect to their striker(s), but Bayern are putting tons of pressure. Villa look organized though.
 

Zososoxfan

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 30, 2009
9,424
South of North
Sane has found the most space for Bayern so far. But he's only sent in a couple of medium-danger crosses.

And now Chelsea pulls one back early! Time for multicast!!
 

Zososoxfan

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 30, 2009
9,424
South of North
Neuer doing Neuer things. Lo Celso just played a beautiful 60 yard pass that beat the entire Bayern backline but Neuer was 5-10 yards out of the box when he calmly chested the ball down to himself while the striker flew by.
 

Kliq

Member
SoSH Member
Mar 31, 2013
23,379
Madrid is super lucky at the moment; Chelsea playing them right off the pitch.
 

Kliq

Member
SoSH Member
Mar 31, 2013
23,379
Bad VAR call from my quick view
It seemed plausible to me that the ball didn't touch Alonso's hand; he was drawing it back and it looked like after the initial ricochet it hit his hip instead of his hand. However; Alonso didn't seem particularly annoyed it was ruled off, which was pretty telling.