re: Super League may NOT actually be happening!

quote:

---

Serie A clubs meeting is now over. Juventus, AC Milan and Inter have announced their intention to stay in the domestic league and play in Serie A also if they’re now part of the #SuperLeague. @SkySport

...UEFA will fight to ban SuperLeague clubs also from domestic leagues.

---

LINK

quote:

---

With qualification guaranteed for ESL, there would be no incentive to take domestic leagues seriousl

---

this is bullshite

or, to put it in amero-football terms, it's rubbish

are we just pretending that UCL doesn't exist, in this hypothetical?

quote:

---

Mathieu Flamini = Tyrann Mathieu

---

i always thought more Claude Makélélé for the Badge

quote:

---

this is bullshite

or, to put it in amero-football terms, it's rubbish

are we just pretending that UCL doesn't exist, in this hypothetical?

---

You realize you have to qualify for the champions league, right? You’re normally a very knowledgeable poster, but you don’t seem to understand European soccer very well

No. You're describing something like the MLS/Liga MX interliga that they used to do many years back.

quote:

---

This is the only thing that can be done to stop this

---

I don’t think it will be done

quote:

---

it would be like Alabama and Clemson having an exhibition match on TV after the actual playoffs occur

---

Except that these aren't friendlies, it's a 20 team international league which would hold matches on the same days as the current international competition if these teams are going to also remain in their respective domestic leagues. There are only so many dates on the calendar.

quote:

---

now i understand that you're arguing money is the issue in a much broader perspective, and i agree with you. i'm just saying the latest money-making endeavor doesn't move the needle with all the other money grabs out there. that's why i brought up the UCL initially, b/c it's a stratifying money grab itself more than anything else

---

Firstly, the UCL codified a whole series of distinct pan-European competitions, which allowed for branding. The history of the CL is couched in the history of early pan-European cups. The consolidation of that is uniquely different from the ESL, in theory and practice. The formation of the PL might be a better analogy.

Secondly, what changed funding mechanisms between the beginning of the UCL and now is the Bosman transfer, which incentivized the selling of players in a very new way, which served as a funding model for many clubs with good youth academies but no desire for top-flight success. What the UCL allowed was for top-down funding mechanisms through larger and larger TV deals. While that mechanism is still there, if the net effect of the top clubs playing their own league is that the funding model for individual leagues becomes smaller, the grassroots effect would be devastating, because we would be returning to that brief period in the late 90's where transfers were the primary funding mechanism, and not a funding model in which all parties see benefit. An exclusionary funding model can work in other leagues, but not in European football, where the training methods are primarily through amateur clubs. It is the same fundamental reason I'm against the franchise model in MLS.

The reaction from English media is distinct from my concerns.

quote:

---

you keep shifting your arguments between the ESL and UCL

---

I didn’t shift anything

quote:

---

teams in the ESL will still try to win their leagues, but if they can't, they will still try to make Europe

---

That won’t be necessary if they’re already guaranteed a place in the Super League

quote:

---

That won’t be necessary if they’re already guaranteed a place in the Super League

---

why?

that's a HUGE assumption with no logic or data behind it