Europe

[Neil Young]

Yes.

Better them than Man City and Arsenal.

Actually, when you think about it, it could be very good. The top teams would have to take the cups more seriously and it would mean less of a cartel at the top as other teams would stand a chance to develop. If a smaller team happened to win the FA Cup two years in a row they'd be in a really good position to threaten the hegemony at the top of the league.

Mind you, I don't think the League Cup should get a CL place.

[Trippendicular]

Yes.

Better them than Man City and Arsenal.

Actually, when you think about it, it could be very good. The top teams would have to take the cups more seriously and it would mean less of a cartel at the top as other teams would stand a chance to develop. If a smaller team happened to win the FA Cup two years in a row they'd be in a really good position to threaten the hegemony at the top of the league.

Mind you, I don't think the League Cup should get a CL place.

Whilst I agree to an extent, surely the point of the Champions League is to pit the world's best players and best teams against each other?

Although at least it could potentially give us an answer to the perennial question of whether Messi could do it on a cold night in Stoke

[Darkon]

So you want Birmingham and potentially Stoke in the Champions League?

as Neil Young says, and I have discussed it with mates a few times, I actually think it would be good for the competition in leagues around Europe, and it would add much more to domestic cups than "play the youngsters and reserves" tournament.

To be honest having a champions league when only a small percentage of them are actual champions of anything makes little sense. Although we get some great teams against eachother it also keeps the status quo of European football.

I like the idea of having the domestic cup winner in the CL instead of the 3rd/4th or what not placed entering the competition. Just look at how long Arsenal (and earlier us for that matter) can keep a top English and European team going without being even close to winning anything.

Get Stoke in the CL, they deserve it far more than Arsenal this season if they win the FA cup.

[Neil Young]

Whilst I agree to an extent, surely the point of the Champions League is to pit the world's best players and best teams against each other?

Although at least it could potentially give us an answer to the perennial question of whether Messi could do it on a cold night in Stoke

At the risk of being cynical, I think the point of the Champions League is to make vast amounts of money for the clubs so that they stay within UEFA so it can continue to make vast amounts of money for itself. It's also a good package for television companies so they can make a lot of money out of it by selling media space to large corporations who wish to advertise their usually underwhelming products to a demographic target that is much sought after and difficult to address otherwise - men, aged 18-54. In this way these major corporations hope to make, er, vast amounts of money.

But I know what you mean.

For fans it's about entertainment really. Of course the top players tend to make for entertaining matches (as is obvious when inadvertently switching over from a Premiership game to any match in the SPL). But a narrow elite at the top of the game works the other way from that - it's boring that at the start of every season there are no more than six teams (and it used to be four) with any aspiration to winning the title, let alone a truly realistic chance.

Swings and roundabouts perhaps.

[Darkon]

Whilst I agree to an extent, surely the point of the Champions League is to pit the world's best players and best teams against each other?

Although at least it could potentially give us an answer to the perennial question of whether Messi could do it on a cold night in Stoke

The CL was a creation by UEFA because top clubs in Spain, Italy, England, Germany and France more or less said they would make their own pan-european league based on the American model of sports if they didn't find a way for them to make more money. The CL was a comprimise instead of taking 20 some clubs out of the national leagues, and keep it in the control of UEFA where the money goes.

CL in thought have very little to do with the sporting side of things, but it have given us some great matches over the years. But it have also sustained and pushed on a very narrow elite of clubs that will stay there due to the financial benefits they reap from being there. The only way to break in to it is by the Man City / Chelsea / Wolfsburg (who are almost relegated this season ) model of getting rich investors that can compensate for the income of the CL. Not a very pretty model in the eye of the sport.

[Fernandinho]

In regards to swapping the CL and EL places. If we did that we could potentially do very poorly in the CL lowering the PL's co-effiecent and lose the places which we were trying to use to effectively change the status quo of the PL. Rendering the idea useless

[Darkon]

In regards to swapping the CL and EL places. If we did that we could potentially do very poorly in the CL lowering the PL's co-effiecent and lose the places which we were trying to use to effectively change the status quo of the PL. Rendering the idea useless

but surely it would be the same for all other countries rendering it back to a good idea?

[Fernandinho]

If they all decided to follow suit... But don't the individual FA's decide how they apply the CL and EL places? So what reason would others have for following if they can make more money out of it as it stands...

It would make sense if every league changed its way....

[Craig_H]

As mentioned, the point of the CL (aside from the money generating bit) is for the best teams and the best players to compete. Giving the FA Cup winners and the League Cup winners a place in it, would be an utter joke. You dont have to be one of the best teams to win a cup, it would be farce.

The name of it is stupid, it should just be the European Cup. But 'champions' or not, the top sides from the top leagues should be in it, not some no marks who finish 14th and manage to win 7 cup games.

The only thing i'd change, would be to give the winners of the Europa League a place in the following season's CL.

[Darkon]

but the only reason the best teams don't win the domestic cup is because they have no incentive money wise, if a CL spot was on hand for winning the FA Cup you would see a dramatic change in the attitude towards it. Then the fight for the fourth place in the PL would all of a sudden be far less interesting than who wins the FA Cup, and that IMO makes perfect sense. I can't see any good argument as to why a fourth place finish should be rewarded better than a silverware winning side.

And the point of the CL is not for the best team to meet eachother by default, then they could just create a European League, abandon the domestic leagues for the best (most popular) domestic teams and get done with it.

@Fernandinho - it's UEFA that decides how the CL spots are handed out.

[dom9]

As mentioned, the point of the CL (aside from the money generating bit) is for the best teams and the best players to compete. Giving the FA Cup winners and the League Cup winners a place in it, would be an utter joke. You dont have to be one of the best teams to win a cup, it would be farce.

The name of it is stupid, it should just be the European Cup. But 'champions' or not, the top sides from the top leagues should be in it, not some no marks who finish 14th and manage to win 7 cup games.

The only thing i'd change, would be to give the winners of the Europa League a place in the following season's CL.

Calling it The Chapions League is an utter joke.

But that joke is so 1991.

[Craig_H]

but the only reason the best teams don't win the domestic cup is because they have no incentive money wise, if a CL spot was on hand for winning the FA Cup you would see a dramatic change in the attitude towards it. Then the fight for the fourth place in the PL would all of a sudden be far less interesting than who wins the FA Cup, and that IMO makes perfect sense. I can't see any good argument as to why a fourth place finish should be rewarded better than a silverware winning side.

And the point of the CL is not for the best team to meet eachother by default, then they could just create a European League, abandon the domestic leagues for the best (most popular) domestic teams and get done with it.

@Fernandinho - it's UEFA that decides how the CL spots are handed out.

So the best teams would shift their focus onto the FA Cup and win it - and you'd just have the same teams qualifying for the CL via winning the FA Cup, as you do qualifying for it via finishing in the top 4.

[Darkon]

Perhaps so, but at least then they won something earning a spot in the competition more than by clinging on to the fourth spot in the league. No matter how you look at it, it would create a more competitative domestic cup and it would still be a shorter way to the big stage for the smaller teams.

And I still havn't heard an argument as to why the CL spot should be handed to the fourth place finishers instead of the domestic cup winner, and mainly because there is no argument other than that's how it's always been (since the CL got introduced).

[dww]

Perhaps so, but at least then they won something earning a spot in the competition more than by clinging on to the fourth spot in the league. No matter how you look at it, it would create a more competitative domestic cup and it would still be a shorter way to the big stage for the smaller teams.

And I still havn't heard an argument as to why the CL spot should be handed to the fourth place finishers instead of the domestic cup winner, and mainly because there is no argument other than that's how it's always been (since the CL got introduced).

The CL is probably still commercially under exploited. For the competition itself the lower predictability of the cup winners means that there is more of a chance of less good teams (both in terms of footballing quality and box office) getting in. There is also more chance of traditional big teams having revenue problems and hence them starting a break away league. So it is in the interests of both FAs and UEFA for the status quo to continue, in political as well as economic terms.

In terms of the entertainment value domestically and for the CL I can see your point. However, the current format and qualifying has generated perhaps the most competitive and consistently high level of football of any club competition ever. That said this year has seen a notable slip in quality for many top sides (possibly because of economic imperatives at all big clubs bar Real and Barcelona dictating that rebuilding programs are more gradual).

I think the financial fair play rules are a better start to a long term program of change than altering the CL qualification. Too much unpredictable change helps no one.

[Craig_H]

Perhaps so, but at least then they won something earning a spot in the competition more than by clinging on to the fourth spot in the league. No matter how you look at it, it would create a more competitative domestic cup and it would still be a shorter way to the big stage for the smaller teams.

And I still havn't heard an argument as to why the CL spot should be handed to the fourth place finishers instead of the domestic cup winner, and mainly because there is no argument other than that's how it's always been (since the CL got introduced).

I would suggest that finishing in the top four, across 38 league games and maintaining the consistency required to do that is harder than winning 7 cup games, and as a consequence, have 'earnt' it more than a side which wins the Cup.

That's why it should go to 4th place, rather than the cup winners - because the side who finishes 4th has done more to earn it, across 38 games, not just 7.