CPL Conspiracy Theory: Proxy War

[youllneverwalkalone]

After reading these two articles, I started to wonder what Atletico's presence and rumours about Lyon and Roma might really be about. 

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.espn.com/soccer/united-states/story/3665748/united-states-canada-mexico-could-form-combined-league-after-2026-world-cup%3fplatform=amp

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.bbc.co.uk/sport/amp/football/46102393

If Atletico are an outsider to any super club consolidation in Europe, do they have a strategic interest to prop up the CPL?

Canada and the US already have joint 1st Division, which seems like a step to a greater reorganization with Mexico. This would be a powerful league in many ways, and could set precedents for Europe.

Atletico, Lyon and Roma are all very similar clubs in their respective leagues. Big enough to thrive on current Champions League revenues, but small enough to be on the outside of this group of 11 (which could be total rubbish, but also seems to make some sense).

What happens to the existing Champions League and revenues if this Euro Super League comes to pass? What happens to domestic revenues if these 11 clubs leave?

Could a strong CPL be seen as part of the means to stop FIFA from allowing a pan North American League? If so, I would think doing so is in the interests of certain clubs in Europe.

Thoughts?

[youllneverwalkalone]

FIFA have traditionally resisted the concept of inter-nation leagues; the more steps in this direction the less resistance? Strong CPL makes a stronger argument for no exemption for Canadian MLS clubs?

Atletico and, I believe, Roma were part of the invitee list mentioned in the fantasy article, but those clubs not part of that 11 aren't really co-existing. I would think the Super League is an existential threat to a lot of clubs in Europe.

[Unnamed Trialist]

There are two things that I would comment. 

One is that this is how the big clubs pressure UEFA into enriching prize money and tv rights of Champions League. So it is a negotiating tactic. UEFA usually responds with a counter proposal.

Second is that there are precedents in other sports, which some of these teams (Real Madrid, Barça, Bayern Munich) know about first hand. I refer to basketball's Euroleague. It is an independent entity (based in Barcelona in fact), a private company, which basically has forced FIBA to accept its role as organiser of the most important European club competition, after a few years of double competitions some 20 years ago.

It is the model for any similar model in football. This year there are 18 clubs/associations, 11 with a permanent contract, another five decided by different criteria (eg winner of the EuroCup, which is a sort of European Uefa cup that FIBA Europe organises), and two wild cards, which are decided annually. They play a year-long league, home and away (34 matches in total), and the top 8 at the end go to playoffs, winners of the quarter finals go to a NCAA style FINAL FOUR. 

Effectively the big clubs could have a disastrous year in their home league and still continue in Euroleague, they are not franchises but contractually ensured. This is what certain big football clubs in Europe are trying to set up, to eliminate their vulnerability when it comes to qualifying for Champions League. The proposed 11 in that article include 5 from England (where at least one would always be left out of Champions, or maybe 2), and then AC Milan who has had bad results for many years now. 

I am personally against any sort of guaranteed revenue on the basis of guaranteeing a team automatically by contract gets into a top-level but derived competition (UEFA competition competitors are derived from national league results), without that being based on results. 

Edited February 3, 2020 by Unnamed Trialist

[Ams1984]

The idea of multinational ‘super’ leagues is seriously repulsive to me on so many levels. I truly hope that this doesn’t happen; it would kill the sport in short order. 

[Cheeta]

There's been blabber about a Euro club league for what has to be close to 30 years.  Still waiting.  Not sure how non-competes work under EU labour law but in years past the consiquences/threat of playing in an unsanctioned league left the scheme in the relm of fan fantasy.

Never know I guess.  Maybe someday.  Money has a way of getting its way.  

[Ansem]

Super leagues won't happen. Confederations makes money with their Champions Leagues so they have no interest in sanctioning such an endeavor.

Also, FIFA just expanded their Club World Cup which uses Champions Leagues as qualifiers. 

I don't take infantino seriously about expanding on cross-border leagues...good luck getting reelected with that one.

Also, hypothetically, if a super league was allowed in North America, there would be little incentive for the CSA to join it nor FMF. CSA would fall into irrelevance and FMF would lose their control/dominance in the region. Everyone would have to play by USSF/MLS rules.

That's why all that noise/crap for a super league comes mainly from the US. All Mexico wants is to make more money on the US market while Canada wants to grow stronger...a super league doesn't do that.

Other hypothesis, Liga MX & MLS merge, this most likely ends the 3 clubs venture in MLS. That would be an opportunity to strengthen CPL and further double down on having a strong pyramid focused on developing talent.

[youllneverwalkalone]

I would think a 20 club NA league with 3 Canadian entries would be extremely profitable and interesting for all three nations. This is the only scenario where I could see media rights eclipsing $500m (or the billion MLS seem to be expecting). I assume FIFA would oppose this without some sort of a carrot, which I think would be promotion/relegation from underlying domestic leagues rather than having "founders" who perpetually control the game.

I would also think Europe would find this threatening. There are around 750m people in Europe. North America has 600m. That's a lot of potential fans who could turn to the local product.

Anyway, I'd be curious to understand what the actual thought process is of all the players: MediaPro, Macron, Atletico. As much as I believe you should always ask for help if you know the right people, you think these entities need some ROI or have a real strategic vision. Or maybe they are just nice folks. 

[narduch]

We've been hearing about a Euro super league for ages now (at least over 20 years?).

I still think its a dumb idea for these clubs.

Its better to be a big fish in a smaller pond sometimes. If teams are perpetually finishing low in this Super League, they will lose most of their gloryhunting fairwether fans.

[Ansem]

1 hour ago, youllneverwalkalone said:

I would think a 20 club NA league with 3 Canadian entries would be extremely profitable and interesting for all three nations. This is the only scenario where I could see media rights eclipsing $500m (or the billion MLS seem to be expecting). I assume FIFA would oppose this without some sort of a carrot, which I think would be promotion/relegation from underlying domestic leagues rather than having "founders" who perpetually control the game.

Super Leagues are mostly to the benefit of club owners, keeping more money to themselves and being less controlled  by their respective associations. This also emphasis why associations would be less likely to vote for such a proposal. Infantino is playing with fire by proposing such a scheme, smaller associations won't like this idea one bit.

There's no Super League format that could net as much cash to FIFA & UEFA as does the Champions League, that's why it's dead on arrival and why it's not coming to North America.

[Unnamed Trialist]

10 hours ago, Ams1984 said:

The idea of multinational ‘super’ leagues is seriously repulsive to me on so many levels. I truly hope that this doesn’t happen; it would kill the sport in short order. 

I agree, and would add that it is not even interesting for the bigger clubs. Barça played Levante yesterday, and that team, a modest La Liga side, was far more talented and played far better than most of the Champions League group stage teams coming through. Those guys were entertaining, not glamorous or famous, but quality football and very well coached.

For me, I rarely even find the Champions draws that interesting anymore, I have seen most clubs in Europe and can't honestly say they are better at Camp Nou than La Liga clubs. Clubs from your own league at least watch you and have your number and can occasionally take you out. Last year Betis played one of the greatest games by a rival I have seen in decades, beating us marvellously. We gave Joaquin a standing ovation when he subbed out and we were losing at the time. Girona drew us, so did Valencia, all tough teams. I can't recall a Champions loss where the rival killed us at home since maybe Bayern six years ago. I think Dynamo Kiev beat us incredibly last century once, with Shevkencho scoring.

I just think the whole conception is wrong, that super clubs in a super league is more entertaining for fans. I am not sure it is. You get used to seeing AC Milan or Spurs the same way you get used to seeing Real Sociedad or Celta Vigo, it is all relative. Proof of this: look at NBA arenas and how many are half empty when the current champs come to town, fans just adjust to the level and get bored just the same. People don't even crowd arenas to see the current MVP and team with the best record in the NBA.

Right now I don't get overly thrilled by any Champions League team, because after a while what you think is this incredible set-up, that enamours club presidents on paper, just gets a bit more mundane. There are every so often players you might want to see, rising stars or legends, but who would that be now? I once went to an Espanyol match just to see Shearer playing for Newcastle. I was pleased to see Scholes play for United. Perhaps the team I would most like to now see is Bayern with Davies. 

Edited February 3, 2020 by Unnamed Trialist

[SoccMan]

3 hours ago, Unnamed Trialist said:

I agree, and would add that it is not even interesting for the bigger clubs. Barça played Levante yesterday, and that team, a modest La Liga side, was far more talented and played far better than most of the Champions League group stage teams coming through. Those guys were entertaining, not glamorous or famous, but quality football and very well coached.

For me, I rarely even find the Champions draws that interesting anymore, I have seen most clubs in Europe and can't honestly say they are better at Camp Nou than La Liga clubs. Clubs from your own league at least watch you and have your number and can occasionally take you out. Last year Betis played one of the greatest games by a rival I have seen in decades, beating us marvellously. We gave Joaquin a standing ovation when he subbed out and we were losing at the time. Girona drew us, so did Valencia, all tough teams. I can't recall a Champions loss where the rival killed us at home since maybe Bayern six years ago. I think Dynamo Kiev beat us incredibly last century once, with Shevkencho scoring.

I just think the whole conception is wrong, that super clubs in a super league is more entertaining for fans. I am not sure it is. You get used to seeing AC Milan or Spurs the same way you get used to seeing Real Sociedad or Celta Vigo, it is all relative. Proof of this: look at NBA arenas and how many are half empty when the current champs come to town, fans just adjust to the level and get bored just the same. People don't even crowd arenas to see the current MVP and team with the best record in the NBA.

Right now I don't get overly thrilled by any Champions League team, because after a while what you think is this incredible set-up, that enamours club presidents on paper, just gets a bit more mundane. There are every so often players you might want to see, rising stars or legends, but who would that be now? I once went to an Espanyol match just to see Shearer playing for Newcastle. I was pleased to see Scholes play for United. Perhaps the team I would most like to now see is Bayern with Davies. 

But seeing the same three or four teams and sometimes just two of the same teams winning everything every year is exciting? In almost all of the worlds domestic leagues there seem to be the same two or three teams winning every year . How is that exciting?  The only thing that saves these leagues are the battles for relegation and European spots, because if it wasn’t for those battles everything else is so predictable.

[SoccMan]

3 hours ago, Ansem said:

Super Leagues are mostly to the benefit of club owners, keeping more money to themselves and being less controlled  by their respective associations. This also emphasis why associations would be less likely to vote for such a proposal. Infantino is playing with fire by proposing such a scheme, smaller associations won't like this idea one bit.

There's no Super League format that could net as much cash to FIFA & UEFA as does the Champions League, that's why it's dead on arrival and why it's not coming to North America.

Your so sure do you have any inside information? Can I have you start picking my lotto numbers ? Never underestimate the power of the almighty dollar and that’s why I would say that never say never when it comes to these super leagues.

[Ansem]

30 minutes ago, SoccMan said:

Your so sure do you have any inside information? Can I have you start picking my lotto numbers ? Never underestimate the power of the almighty dollar and that’s why I would say that never say never when it comes to these super leagues.

Almighty dollar...

Ok...

What about the pound?

Edited February 4, 2020 by Ansem

[Unnamed Trialist]

3 hours ago, SoccMan said:

But seeing the same three or four teams and sometimes just two of the same teams winning everything every year is exciting? In almost all of the worlds domestic leagues there seem to be the same two or three teams winning every year . How is that exciting?  The only thing that saves these leagues are the battles for relegation and European spots, because if it wasn’t for those battles everything else is so predictable.

Because the parity system in MLS is so exciting, right? And so interesting?

The best team in the league of the past 5 years is Seattle, on the basis of MLS Cup appearances and wins. No rival team in MLS has their fans lining up to see them. In fact, in MLS, few fans get excited about any rival's visit, and there are only a handful of players of any status worth coming out to watch, on paper. At least, if you are in Serie A, Juventus is a juggernaut, and if you can get a result it's monumental.

Every fan in a league dominated by a few teams has their reasons for supporting their team, and do it regardless of what you are saying. Look at the full, enthusiastic stadiums in Germany for teams that have little chance of winning anything.

[Unnamed Trialist]

2 hours ago, Lofty said:

These super leagues aren't really about more money, they are about concentating existing money into the hands of fewer people.

That is not to say they couldn't happen though. The UEFA so called "Champions League", which is in actuality anything but, was born out of a threat by the top European club teams to break away and form their own league. But in this case the new format does actually generate more money because there are a lot more matches.

What does not make sense is that the big 5 in England want this super league, then accept this glut of useless fixtures in the English system, with FA replays and other cups no one cares about, and overplaying over Xmas and burning out players mid season. They all go to the US and elsewhere for those preseason tournaments which do not really help the team prepare for a tough season.

If they were so intent on giving their fans total quality football and making money, they'd want to reduce their EPL load and expand Champions. At least in Germany and Italy they have just 18 team leagues and could take in more fixtures. So I agree with you, they keep talking about this stuff, but there is little action to indicate they are serious. 

In Spain, this year, at least they've eliminated home and away in the Cup, all matches are single knock-out and it's been great, and they've reduced fixtures this way.

So what I am saying, sort of agreeing, is that you cannot overstate this, nor take such threats of a super league over seriously.

Edited February 4, 2020 by Unnamed Trialist

[Watchmen]

1 hour ago, Unnamed Trialist said:

What does not make sense is that the big 5 in England want this super league, then accept this glut of useless fixtures in the English system, with FA replays and other cups no one cares about, and overplaying over Xmas and burning out players mid season. They all go to the US and elsewhere for those preseason tournaments which do not really help the team prepare for a tough season.

Starting last year, the FA Cup eliminated replays from the 5th round onward (Premier League teams join in the 3rd), while the manager of their current league leader has hit out at the FA for how they schedule replays for it.  I'd hardly say the big clubs in England "accept" this system, but rather it's what the FA wants.  Single knockout is great.  But that's on the FA, not the big clubs.

Also, it's not like Barcelona doesn't also fly all over the world to participate in preseason tournaments.  Hell, La Liga has twice now tried to move league games over to the US.

[Unnamed Trialist]

4 hours ago, Watchmen said:

Starting last year, the FA Cup eliminated replays from the 5th round onward (Premier League teams join in the 3rd), while the manager of their current league leader has hit out at the FA for how they schedule replays for it.  I'd hardly say the big clubs in England "accept" this system, but rather it's what the FA wants.  Single knockout is great.  But that's on the FA, not the big clubs.

Also, it's not like Barcelona doesn't also fly all over the world to participate in preseason tournaments.  Hell, La Liga has twice now tried to move league games over to the US.

La Liga teams do the same thing, drive their players into the ground with extra fixtures, like this year's SuperCup played in Saudi Arabia (in the past it was home and away in August before the season started, and only two teams). For years it was the big clubs who resisted single knockout in the Cup as they always knew home and away benefitted them against being upset by a weaker or lower division side. Then they muse about a Super League dominated by only "quality" visiting teams in big money matches. I'd say they are equally deluded. 

In Champions this year we had the visit of Slavia Praga, who actually drew us. But you can't call that a huge draw. Dortmund and Inter, now a better team. Now we get Napoli. It is not like Champions League is any better than a visit from Sevilla, Valencia, Real Sociedad, never mind the even bigger clubs. I think it must be the same in England, there are plenty of tough rivals who are entertaining, you don't need a European super league to see quality football.

BTW, you are right about La Liga trying to schedule a game in the US, a league match (Girona-Barça last year), and for me I understood the rationale, to grow the audience, since the Liga still lags behind the EPL in audience. But of course that would have robbed Girona fans of seeing Barça in their home stadium for one of the most important fixtures of the year.

Edited February 4, 2020 by Unnamed Trialist

[Tigers]

On 2/4/2020 at 12:32 AM, Unnamed Trialist said:

, and if you can get a result it's monumental.

I've always hated this phrase. Losing is a result too.

[Tigers]

2 hours ago, Lofty said:

A fellow pedant! Welcome!

 😂 

Happily accepted 🍻

[Unnamed Trialist]

6 hours ago, Lofty said:

A fellow pedant! Welcome!

I think there is an implied "good" right before "result" that is rather lazily omitted.

And please don't tell me that you "could care less" or I will have to explain why that means that you DO care! 😂 

Quite the day we're having, don't you think?

[ted]

18 hours ago, Lofty said:

A fellow pedant! Welcome!

I think there is an implied "good" right before "result" that is rather lazily omitted.

And please don't tell me that you "could care less" or I will have to explain why that means that you DO care! 😂 

I could care less how you get a result.

https://www.linguisticsociety.org/content/english-changing

[SkuseisLoose]

On 2/3/2020 at 9:38 PM, Unnamed Trialist said:

What does not make sense is that the big 5 in England want this super league, then accept this glut of useless fixtures in the English system, with FA replays and other cups no one cares about, and overplaying over Xmas and burning out players mid season. They all go to the US and elsewhere for those preseason tournaments which do not really help the team prepare for a tough season.

Only big team fans call these cups useless. These are often the best chances for “smaller” clubs to qualify for Europe. In my opinion the FA should petition UEFA to allow the fa cup winner to qualify for the champions league. It would probably make the big teams care a bit more.

[Watchmen]

4 hours ago, SkuseisLoose said:

Only big team fans call these cups useless. These are often the best chances for “smaller” clubs to qualify for Europe. In my opinion the FA should petition UEFA to allow the fa cup winner to qualify for the champions league. It would probably make the big teams care a bit more.

Would they actually have to petition UEFA for that?  I've just always assumed the leagues decided how they wanted to allocate their berths in Europe.

[Unnamed Trialist]

11 hours ago, SkuseisLoose said:

Only big team fans call these cups useless. These are often the best chances for “smaller” clubs to qualify for Europe. In my opinion the FA should petition UEFA to allow the fa cup winner to qualify for the champions league. It would probably make the big teams care a bit more.

The Carabao Cup, quite the rage. All the fans just rave about how useful and exciting it is--for the sponsors.

[SkuseisLoose]

7 hours ago, Unnamed Trialist said:

The Carabao Cup, quite the rage. All the fans just rave about how useful and exciting it is--for the sponsors.

My dad is a lifelong Leicester supporter and grew up going to games. If we hadn’t won the league the only two time he would have seen them in Europe was due to the league cup. Nah maybe a Liverpool or Chelsea’s supporter thinks it’s stupid as they’re already in Europe guaranteed every season. To them it just creates fixture congestion but to fans of non top 6 teams these cups are massive. And beyond that these cups are important to the clubs to non prem teams. Having a prem team come to town or a away day at a big club can be hugely important for these clubs financially. Cup runs for small teams like Shrewsbury can help pay for better players to move up the divisions. Now I’m not saying clubs rely on the cups, they don’t, but having these cups are important to 90% of fans and most clubs. In my opinion it’s disgusting what some managers do to disrespect the cup. They run out a youth team with out a care in the world if they win. They don’t have to put out a first team obviously but at least put out the second team and a couple reserves. There’s always discussion about removing the League cup but when you look at the conversations it’s only ever supporters of the big 6 who want it gone.

14 hours ago, Watchmen said:

Would they actually have to petition UEFA for that?  I've just always assumed the leagues decided how they wanted to allocate their berths in Europe.

Yes they would as the rules state all champions league spot must be based on the league and not cup competitions.