Nah... marketing says that New Uefa Cup is more appealing!Overgame wrote:Brand new ? Call it "the old UEFA Cup".
CL reform for the 2018-2021 cycle
Gone.
Also, why not lose the term Cup. Kind of mold-ish. We could call it "UEFA Challenger".nemesys wrote:Nah... marketing says that New Uefa Cup is more appealing!Overgame wrote:Brand new ? Call it "the old UEFA Cup".
And "Globalization League" is much better name than CL.
From the back page of today's Times:
15 points for CL in last 5 years
10 for CL since 1992
5 for pre-1992 European Cup
15 points for CL in last 5 years
10 for CL since 1992
5 for pre-1992 European Cup
No to Superleague
The article also implies coefficient will be a factor in prize money. Real Madrid's coefficient stands to increase by 90.
No to Superleague
- AlanK
- Senior Member
- Posts: 17501
- Joined: Mon Dec 12, 2005 23:48
- Location: Salem, Oregon and Barcelona, Spain; occasionally Lisboa
Ain't this fun Wondering about points from UEFA Cup and similar going to Real Madrid, for example, which would up their "added coefficient points" to 92 rather than to 90. Would seem that this should happen, at the very least for the sake of consistency. This may have been answered elsewhere on Forum 1 or on Forum 2--it's hard to digest all of the changes.Thunder_PT wrote:Does anyone know if the old "EL" points are given to both the winners of UC and CWC?
"I knowed this war a bad idear."--or perhaps, "What in the world were those idiots thinking "
"Past performance is no guarantee of future results."
- bert.kassies
- Posts: 823
- Joined: Wed Nov 23, 2005 11:26
- Location: Netherlands
- Contact:
The history of football is a sad voyage from beauty to duty. When the sport became an industry, the beauty that blossoms from the joy of play got torn out by its very roots. In this world, professional football condemns all that is useless, and useless means not profitable.
Eduardo Galeano
Found that quote by this nice article: REFORM OF THE C1: THE LAW OF THE STRONGEST?
Eduardo Galeano
Found that quote by this nice article: REFORM OF THE C1: THE LAW OF THE STRONGEST?
UEFA European Cup Football for all UEFA coefficients and rankings
From what I've read it seems that there will be bonus points for UEFA Cup titles, but not for the Cup Winners Cup. That is odd, considering that for the entire history of the CWC, it was regarded a higher competition - if you qualified for both the CWC and UEFA Cup, it was the CWC that took precedence.
No to Superleague
- AlanK
- Senior Member
- Posts: 17501
- Joined: Mon Dec 12, 2005 23:48
- Location: Salem, Oregon and Barcelona, Spain; occasionally Lisboa
Yes, agree that it's "odd"; UEFA seems to have invoked Calvinball rulesOldelpaso wrote:From what I've read it seems that there will be bonus points for UEFA Cup titles, but not for the Cup Winners Cup. That is odd, considering that for the entire history of the CWC, it was regarded a higher competition - if you qualified for both the CWC and UEFA Cup, it was the CWC that took precedence.
"Past performance is no guarantee of future results."
Mine was just a sarcastic reference to this well known episode.ignjat63 wrote:Also, why not lose the term Cup. Kind of mold-ish. We could call it "UEFA Challenger".nemesys wrote:Nah... marketing says that New Uefa Cup is more appealing!Overgame wrote:Brand new ? Call it "the old UEFA Cup".
And "Globalization League" is much better name than CL.
""" New Coke was the unofficial name for the reformulation of Coca-Cola introduced in April 1985 by The Coca-Cola Company to replace the original formula of its flagship soft drink, Coca-Cola (also called Coke). """
""" the American public's reaction to the change was negative, even hostile, and the new cola was a major marketing failure. The subsequent, rapid reintroduction of Coke's original formula (the original formula was re-branded as "Coca-Cola Classic" and was put into market within three months of New Coke's debut) resulted in a significant gain in sales. """
""" New Coke was only on the market in the United States for a short period, but it remains influential as a cautionary tale against tampering too extensively with a well-established and successful brand. It was discontinued internationally in July 2002. """
Source: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/New_Coke
So, well, maybe better " Uefa Cup Classic " ?
Gone.
- bert.kassies
- Posts: 823
- Joined: Wed Nov 23, 2005 11:26
- Location: Netherlands
- Contact:
In the ECA presentation there is only a small table with two columns, labeled "UCL" and "UEL". And the last row is labeled "Before 1992/93". So for me it is still an open question what "UEL before 1992/93" means.Oldelpaso wrote:From what I've read it seems that there will be bonus points for UEFA Cup titles, but not for the Cup Winners Cup. That is odd, considering that for the entire history of the CWC, it was regarded a higher competition - if you qualified for both the CWC and UEFA Cup, it was the CWC that took precedence.
UEFA European Cup Football for all UEFA coefficients and rankings
My guess is both, CWC and UC. EL includes cup winners. Just my two cents.bert.kassies wrote:In the ECA presentation there is only a small table with two columns, labeled "UCL" and "UEL". And the last row is labeled "Before 1992/93". So for me it is still an open question what "UEL before 1992/93" means.
Gone.
-
- Senior Member
- Posts: 10871
- Joined: Mon Jan 14, 2008 23:36
- Location: Madrid, Spain
Prize money by coefficient? If true, that's the biggest insult of all these changes.
- Arges Pitesti
- Posts: 983
- Joined: Mon Sep 03, 2007 21:02
Overgame wrote:Brand new ? Call it "the old UEFA Cup".nemesys wrote:Where do I sign?Arges Pitesti wrote:My idea for a brand new European Cup for Clubs.
- 128 teams
- all KO round, double leg
- round of 128, 64, 32 from September till December
- round of 16, quarter, semi and final from February till May
It will never happen, but I feel a bit less lonely now.
Old Uefa Cup, sure.
Plus: Old Champions Cup.
Plus: Old Cup Winners Cup.
The cream of European Club Football.
That's the way it should always be.
"Better lose one match 5-0 than five 1-0" W. Boskov
-
- Posts: 483
- Joined: Wed Apr 21, 2010 15:09
It would mean the Scottish Champion starting QR1 instead of QR2... at the end of June or start of July, instead of halfway through July.
However, there are 2 utterly unnecessary aspects:
(1) having cut the Champions Pathway from 5 slots to 4 and dropped the 11th & 12th ranked countries into that Pathway, they're letting 11th & 12th enter in QR4; 13th & 14th in QR3; and 15th-17th in QR2... This forces all the other champions into QR1! And they are making the four lowest champions play two rounds of preliminaries, just to make it into QR1! They should make the top champions in the pathway enter earlier to shorten everything.
(2) if the titleholder slots go unused they are just giving them to 11th & 12th... They should give them to the Champions Pathway so fewer clubs have to enter in QR1 and create more opportunities to reach Groupstages.
We knew they were going to cut the Non-Champions Pathway from 5 slots to just 2: the two options seems to be whether 13-15th should stop getting runners-up in the tournament or not.
However, there are 2 utterly unnecessary aspects:
(1) having cut the Champions Pathway from 5 slots to 4 and dropped the 11th & 12th ranked countries into that Pathway, they're letting 11th & 12th enter in QR4; 13th & 14th in QR3; and 15th-17th in QR2... This forces all the other champions into QR1! And they are making the four lowest champions play two rounds of preliminaries, just to make it into QR1! They should make the top champions in the pathway enter earlier to shorten everything.
(2) if the titleholder slots go unused they are just giving them to 11th & 12th... They should give them to the Champions Pathway so fewer clubs have to enter in QR1 and create more opportunities to reach Groupstages.
We knew they were going to cut the Non-Champions Pathway from 5 slots to just 2: the two options seems to be whether 13-15th should stop getting runners-up in the tournament or not.
Personally, I don't see any problem in having the lowest ranked champions play two preliminary rounds. As long as UEFA makes sure that their travel expenses are covered and players can be compensated for income losses at work, where is the harm?
Many of those leagues are "calendar year leagues" anyway or have not more than 18 games per season. So having them play a couple of rounds in July is no problem at all for scheduling. Most of their players are locals with an everyday job anyway, so no problem with that transfer period stuff.
Many of those leagues are "calendar year leagues" anyway or have not more than 18 games per season. So having them play a couple of rounds in July is no problem at all for scheduling. Most of their players are locals with an everyday job anyway, so no problem with that transfer period stuff.
"Put it in your signature to save you the trouble of writing it over and over again."