Has the 'Champions League' got any credibility now?

Mr.Nice Guy · 02-05-2007 10:11PM #1

I will preface this post by saying that I respect the efforts of both Liverpool and Milan in making the Champions League final and they deserve a lot of credit for doing so. I don't wish to belittle their performances but rather to make the following point:

Current Premiership standings:

1 Man Utd - 85 pts
2 Chelsea - 80 pts
3 Liverpool - 67 pts

Current Serie A standings:

1 Inter Milan - 87 pts
2 Roma - 69 pts
3 AC Milan - 59 pts

Now it would seem to me that a European Cup final ought to showcase the two greatest teams in Europe. Based on the above domestic tables, that is not what we are going to get this year in Athens at all.

So my question to you all is this - is it time to revamp the format of the Champions League?

Royale with Cheese · 02-05-2007 10:14PM

Sure, revamp it.

Play no games at all until the end of the season where the two teams with the most points per game in their own leagues play a one-off game to decide the best team in Europe.

The format is fine. It's a knock out competition. Anybody can win. Nobody says that the winners of the Champions League are the best two teams in Europe.

A Dub in Glasgo · 02-05-2007 10:15PM

This is not the fist time nor will it be the last time that the monkier 'Champions League' is sadly deficient

redzerdrog · 02-05-2007 10:16PM

yeh your right there was no point in playing the stupid tournament they should have just let man utd into the final and let inter play barca in the semis to see who get the chance to play the great man utd in the final. It would have saved an awfull lot of time and hassle.

royal with cheese got there before me.

Call Me Jimmy · 02-05-2007 10:16PM

Oooh u ain't gonna be too popular with this thread :P

Well in fairness milan were docked how many points? The would be a lot closer to inter this season if they didn't start on minus points. But other than that, I would say that it has always been far from guaranteed that the two finalists would be league leaders in their respective leagues.

bbbbb · 02-05-2007 10:20PM

Qualifying is based on last season, not this. But then neither of these were champions last year.
Also Milan started this season with a points penalty (eight I think)

PauloMN · 02-05-2007 10:20PM

Mr.Nice Guy wrote:

I will preface this post by saying that I respect the efforts of both Liverpool and Milan in making the Champions League final and they deserve a lot of credit for doing so. I don't wish to belittle their performances but rather to make the following point:

Current Premiership standings:

1 Man Utd - 85 pts
2 Chelsea - 80 pts
3 Liverpool - 67 pts

Current Serie A standings:

1 Inter Milan - 87 pts
2 Roma - 69 pts
3 AC Milan - 59 pts

Now it would seem to me that a European Cup final ought to showcase the two greatest teams in Europe. Based on the above domestic tables, that is not what we are going to get this year in Athens at all.

So my question to you all is this - is it time to revamp the format of the Champions League?

Why revamp it? What do you suggest? Would it only work for you if current league title holders were in the competition?

I think the format of the competition is spot on and makes for great games for the most part. It also allows "lesser" teams the chance for the ultimate in silverware or at least to have played a series of games against the best teams of Europe.

Guy:Incognito · 02-05-2007 10:22PM

Liverpool finished 5th in 2005 and it was one of, if not the best final ever. If it was champions only, Liverpool, Utd and Milan wouldnt have been in the smie's. The fact that UTd are going to win the league this year has no bearing on the champions league as the qualification is based on last season so using the current league table is irrelevant. It used to be a knockout only, and with only the winners. the result was that teams like Malmo got to the final. It was easier to win years ago, so yes, it is credible and is harder to win.

The champions of each country have as good a chance to win it as anyone, yet they arent there.When Utd won it in 99 they hadnt won the league the year before wither.

Taking Liverpool as an example, to win it it2005 they had to beat the top 2 in Italy, the English champions and a Leverkusen side that had torn Real apart. This time they beat Barce (Spanish champs), PSV (dutch champs) and Chlesea again (English Champs). You cant argue with the calibreof sides that they are beating to win the competition/get to the final.

Zaph · 02-05-2007 10:22PM

This year's tables have nothing to do with this year's Champions League, you should have shown last season's. Not that there's any real difference, just sayin'.

DerekD Goldfish · 02-05-2007 10:22PM

I think there should be a max of 2 teams from each country in the CL
still both milan and liverpool are deserved finalists

Stky10 · 02-05-2007 10:22PM

If ManU can't beat the third best team in the Italian league, then they shouldn't be considered one of the two best teams in Europe, and so shouldn't be in the 'Champions League' Final no matter what format you decide on.

The only way to get around this would be to have an actual champions league league, but thats not going to happen any time soon.

eirebhoy · 02-05-2007 10:24PM

Milan would have beaten any team in the world tonight so I've no problem with them getting to the final. Questions have to be asked how they perform so much better in Europe than domestically but they deserve their place in the final.

The Muppet · 02-05-2007 10:25PM

It's the most prestigeous cup competition in europe so in that regard it has credability.

Dave! · 02-05-2007 10:26PM

Yes, it has credibility.

DerekD Goldfish · 02-05-2007 10:27PM

eirebhoy wrote:

Milan would have beaten any team in the world tonight so I've no problem with them getting to the final. Questions have to be asked how they perform so much better in Europe than domestically but they deserve their place in the final.

They have been on great form the past 2 months its just Iters fantastic seaosn and milans worst home run in 50 years mid season ment they hadnt a hope of keeping up.

Zaph · 02-05-2007 10:29PM

I think the only problem with it is the name. Because of the fact that non-league winners are in it, it's effectively now a "Super-UEFA Cup". There's not necessarily anything wrong with that, but UEFA should change the name to something that actually reflects who's playing in it.

mada999 · 02-05-2007 10:30PM

Troll ??

PauloMN · 02-05-2007 10:32PM

What was wrong with "European Cup" anyway?

RasTa · 02-05-2007 10:33PM

Of course it does.

Guy:Incognito · 02-05-2007 10:35PM

Theres a Utd or Chelsea fan on Your on Sky sports now ranting about this.He's syaing the FA should Jose and fergie letter of commendation for treating the cups and the league with 100% commitement and mentioned the FA and Carling cup specifically.I assume he didnt watch the Utd Carling cup game where they were knocked out by Southend while playing a weakend team. People really need to do their homework before going on a rant about stupid things.

Zaph · 02-05-2007 10:35PM

mada999 wrote:

Troll ??

I hope that's not aimed at me!

PauloMN wrote:

What was wrong with "European Cup" anyway?

Absolutely nothing, but it wasn't sexy enough for the marketing people.

jank · 02-05-2007 10:43PM

Well would you be complaining if you were in the final??

Mr.Nice Guy · 02-05-2007 10:45PM

PauloMN wrote:

Why revamp it? What do you suggest? Would it only work for you if current league title holders were in the competition?

I think it has lost a degree of credibility myself. It's called the 'Champions League' but it will be contested by teams who are nowhere near the best from a domestic standpoint.

I will also point out that Michel Platini has voiced similar concerns...

Four clubs are too many - for the country itself, the fans and TV rights. Three should be the limit, there are not enough national champions in the last 32 of the tournament and that cannot be right.

Just seems like money is making a mockery of the game.

Zaph · 02-05-2007 10:45PM

Absolutely not. I'm a Leeds fan, I'd be happy with the Championship next season

Töpher · 02-05-2007 10:46PM

Remove seedings, open cup draw from the first round. Oh wait...

Guy:Incognito · 02-05-2007 10:47PM

Mr.Nice Guy wrote:

I think it has lost a degree of credibility myself. It's called the 'Champions League' but it will be contested by teams who are nowhere near the best from a domestic standpoint..

Only because the teams that won their leagues were knocked out by so called "lesser" teams. Is it Liverpool or Milans fault that they knocke dout teams that won their leagues? (actually it is, but you know what I mean:) )

Mr.Nice Guy · 02-05-2007 10:52PM

Stekelly wrote:

Only because the teams that won their leagues were knocked out by so called "lesser" teams. Is it Liverpool or Milans fault that they knocke dout teams that won their leagues? (actually it is, but you know what I mean:) )

I take your point and that's why I prefaced my original post by saying that my beef was not with Liverpool or Milan. It's not their fault how the competition is set up.

My gripe is with the format itself which doesn't, in my opinion, reflect what a competition called the 'Champion's League' ought to reflect.

Are Liverpool the best team in England? No. Are Milan the best team in Italy? No. Yet we'll have to accept one of them as being the best team in Europe.

Royale with Cheese · 02-05-2007 10:55PM

Mr.Nice Guy wrote:

I think it has lost a degree of credibility myself. It's called the 'Champions League' but it will be contested by teams who are nowhere near the best from a domestic standpoint

So what will happen. They'll take 3rd/4th place teams like Liverpool, Arsenal, Real Madrid, Valencia out of the competition and replace them with the Finnish champions? You think that'd make a better competition, or give it more credibility? Should Shelbourne be in the competition instead of Bremen? Reducing the number of overall teams would suck as I quite enjoy watching the champions league, and less games for me to watch would not be great. This argument always boils down to people bringing up the name 'champions' league. Lobby for a f*cking name change if it bothers you that much.

The format is spot on at the moment.

Call Me Jimmy · 02-05-2007 10:57PM

Mr.Nice Guy wrote:

I take your point and that's why I prefaced my original post by saying that my beef was not with Liverpool or Milan. It's not their fault how the competition is set up.

My gripe is with the format itself which doesn't, in my opinion, reflect what a competition called the 'Champion's League' ought to reflect.

Are Liverpool the best team in England? No. Are Milan the best team in Italy? No. Yet we'll have to accept one of them as being the best team in Europe.

Maybe the revamp should be that they rename it to the less-misleading and imo better name of 'The European Cup'. I think it has a greater weight to it, and it also doesn't imply that you have to be the best team in your country to win it.

EDIT: ^^^^ Pipped to the post

Tusky · 02-05-2007 10:58PM

Really really stupid thread. Lets just ban all the other teams from all competitions and have Chelsea v Man Utd & Barcelona v Real Madrid week in week out.

Its a cup, anyone can win it and I personally prefer when underdogs do well.

Mr.Nice Guy wrote:

I take your point and that's why I prefaced my original post by saying that my beef was not with Liverpool or Milan. It's not their fault how the competition is set up.

My gripe is with the format itself which doesn't, in my opinion, reflect what a competition called the 'Champion's League' ought to reflect.

Are Liverpool the best team in England? No. Are Milan the best team in Italy? No. Yet we'll have to accept one of them as being the best team in Europe.

Are Italy the best national team in the world ? Are Greece the best European team ?

Mr Alan · 02-05-2007 11:01PM

Mr.Nice Guy wrote:

I take your point and that's why I prefaced my original post by saying that my beef was not with Liverpool or Milan. It's not their fault how the competition is set up.

My gripe is with the format itself which doesn't, in my opinion, reflect what a competition called the 'Champion's League' ought to reflect.

Are Liverpool the best team in England? No. Are Milan the best team in Italy? No. Yet we'll have to accept one of them as being the best team in Europe.

Fair enough, but i'd love to know the amount of Champions over the years that weren't the winners of their league the previous season. For example pretty sure United didn't win the league the year before they beat Munich?!

Champions League should have all the top teams in Europe involved, and in my opinion it does.

Has the 'Champions League' got any credibility now?

Comments