CL Knockouts- good or bad

Bateman

The current structure makes the rich richer and the poor poorer. More entertainment for the fans will be the result of less groups and more knockout matches. In order to win Europe's Premier club competition, teams will not be able to afford to lose 4-5 games and still be crowned "Champions". But the TV dose will be down somewhat. And people might start to pass more exams.

Over to you.

Bateman

For the record, I'm in favour.

Dustaz

I dont think youll find too many people against the changes. Nearly everyone agrees the opening group stage is pointless in the current format. Also, hasnt research shown that football has reached saturation point (for the general viewing audience)?

Bigger games, less often means more market share overall.

jonno

Im for more knockout stages. It will filter out the teams that aren't cut out to be champions instead of them losing group games, barely scraping through and then becoming champs.

Waylander

Nearly everyone agrees the opening group stage is pointless in the current format

As do I, but having said that you do see some big teams going out after the first round. Liverpool this season, last season Barca and a couple of Italian clubs. So it can be interesting

cournioni

If its a total knock out competition then there's no need for it to be called the Champions League is there? For starters, not all the teams are champions of their nations league. And secondly it will hardly even be a league. I'd say that they should just go back to the old way they had it, with all the champions and have only one group stage with the quarter finals after that stage.

woosaysdan

i think they should change the name to the certain champions and runners up league!!!

BKtje

tbh by champions i no longer believe they mean the winners of their respective leagues but the creme de la creme of european football.

ie teams like Man u who didn win or even come 2nd last season but are undoubtdly one of the best in europe. TBH i think it makes for a much more exciting competition with most of thebest teams and not just the champions.

Tho tbh top 3 is as far as they should go, maybe back to top 2. If they go to top4 etc it will just become ridiculous.

TwoShedsJackson

Definitely in favour - the current structure means it drags on too long, too many matches devalues the 'special' nature of most of these European encounters - matches which are supposed to be a major event, in most cases.

Delighted with the new format.

knobbles

two group phases is ridiculous,
the opening round of 8 groups is fine cause teams deserve a chance to settle into the competition, but it should go straight into a knockout with the emerging 16 teams from the first phase, similar format to the world cup. i believe this is the new format next year, much better.

there's an incentive for teams to even finish third in the first phase and land a place in the last 32 of the uefa but this second group phase is far too indulgent - it's there because the money , not the football and the football suffers as a result - Man Utd can afford to field a reserve team for their next two matches - fair enough, that's their award but that scenario wouldn't exist if it was a knockout stage.

Makaveli

Originally posted by B-K-DzR
Tho tbh top 3 is as far as they should go, maybe back to top 2. If they go to top4 etc it will just become ridiculous.

Top 4 only qualify from Spain and England, I dont think it happens in Italy. Basically they earned the right to have 4 participants by ranking well in European competitions.

It really should go back to 2 or 3 max and yes scrapping the second group stage is a good thing.

Bateman

It should to back to one, but financial concerns mean its unlikely in the near future.

i think football was probably more unpredictable when the notts forests and steaua bucharests were winning european cups. the sampdorias and red star belgrades were posing a threat to the big boys. would love for that day to come back. i think the gulf of financial difference will never resume the way it used to be unless it be a case of what comes up must go down. i think the premiership clubs should be glad of the depleted format as it increases their chance of chasing multiple trophies. its a sad day for football when its just about the money and flying the flag for your country takes a back seat.

mike65

Glad to the back of the second group stage, but would like to see a return to the "classic" European Cup format.
Won't happen of course as it'll mean a big income loss of a lot of clubs.

I'd like to see the Cup Winners Cup
return as well, such was the diveristy of teams taking part it had a place I think.

Mike.

knobbles

Originally posted by mike65
Glad to the back of the second group stage, but would like to see a return to the "classic" European Cup format.
Won't happen of course as it'll mean a big income loss of a lot of clubs.

I'd like to see the Cup Winners Cup
return as well, such was the diveristy of teams taking part it had a place I think.

Mike.

nah, two cups is enough, though the old format was pretty straight forward(which is a plus) :
- cup winners only here
- league champs only here
- all losers over here

but the less cups there is, the more special the existing cups become.

Pigman II

I'm all in favour of more knockout ties but unlike most people here I think they should get rid of the FIRST group stage and not the SECOND one. Afterall nobody wants to see Real Madrid playing six matches against the likes of Rosenburg, Levski Sofia and Molde (yes they are a real team!) but they wouldn't mind seeing them in action 6times against top quality sides later on in the competition if they already hadn't had to sit thru a group stage of mostly onesided matches.

People aren't jaded of the champ league structure because ManU seem to come up against Juventus every year, they are jaded because they've already had to sit thru 8-10 matches against crap opposition in order to get to that point.

And don't give me the GAA argument that smaller clubs need the chance to play more matches in order to improve cos I haven't heard from Skonto Riga or Rosenburg lately. Don't get me wrong I'm a bohs supporter so the current format would be more suited to my team (if they ever got there!) but for the competition itself its only devaluing the quality on show.

And don't forget the less matches a smaller team plays the more chance they have of making an impact on the public imagination ... as the people on this thread who hark back to the days of Steaua Bucharest have already mentioned.

So basically, what I suggest is make the champions league a 32 compitition team (as before) with a two leg knockout in the first round. Then 4 x 4 groups of four with ONLY the winnners of each group going into the semifinals. That way there would be none of this 'win your first four and play the reserves for the next two' that top teams seem to be employing nowadays. It also mean that the winning team would only have to play 11 games (remember all the moaning about fixture conjestion?) but would really have proven themselves superior in both league and cup competition.

For verification I remeber back around 1992 when Marseilles and Rangers were in a group situation (where only the winners could make it to the final) and it set up a situation where every single group match they played was vital and the matches against each were epic stuff. How often could you say that about todays champ league group stages?

Of course neither UEFA nor the top clubs would ever go for it .