CL format

[nemesys]

Sarcasm? Me? No, never. I do really support a 48 team CL format. With like 2 additional spots for the Big Four. With like 13 additional spots for Eastern Europe and the Balcans. With the remaining additional spot for the winners of the north-oceanic qualifying zone of Faroes, Greenland and Iceland. But sarcasm? No way...

What about 42 clubs. 7 groups of 6. The first two qualify. That's 14. Plus the club with the sexiest player, and the one with player having the sexiest girlfriend (this to please TV cameras in need to take the face of random people, rather than the action on the pitch).

***

More seriously, groups of 4 with the top 2 qualifying are of course the less of the evils if a group stage is needed.

I do think that in a WC a group stage with groups of 4 works, and it is logic, for the following reasons:
- it is a single round robin, in neutral field, so each match still have pretty high value;
- the event is every 4 years, a whole nation qualifying and going home after a single match, because of a very nasty draw, without any clue about being there next time, sounds tough even for someone like me who is cynical about sport events and likes this kind of in or out challenges without a second chance, so give each nation at least 3 matches to show something is more than understandable, especially since nations from different continents rarely meet each other anyways, so the match still a novelty many times.

In a European Cup tournament, let say that a group stage phase "it is not my cup of tea", for the following reasons:
- it is a double round robin, so each match has really little value, and an epic result will miss to make history;
- the event is every year, and most countries (especially with strict KO format) will be represented by more than a single club each season (especially considering more than one tournament), and will be represented (by the same, or other clubs) the next season;
- with a GS phase the number of member countries represented in the main tournament is limited, while I honestly like to see the most possible nations members into the main competition, this not excluding a sport meritocracy ranking, based on previous results (i.e. Uefa Ranking, of course), allowing the most successful nations (and the absolute best clubs) to be there, to get more spots, and to be seeded at least in the first few rounds of the competition, to avoid a silly, for instance, Barca - Bayern, already in Autumn, actually I would be in favor of a fixed draw before day 1, like in Wimbledon, where the best 2 can meet only in final, the top 4 can meet only is SF, the top 8 in QF, and so on, this also for preparing the organization of potential travels for the next rounds by the clubs involved;
- In a strict KO system of 128 clubs (or why not 256 clubs) you would have space for everybody, to challenge each other, on a equal level, with no one starting the season June, while others start in September, and giving all an equal chance to prepare the team physically and on the football market as well;
- Even if you need, say, a QR between the lowest ranked nations to avoid the presence of too many extremely low level competitors, it is only one QR which can be played in the second half of August;
- You would have a chance, every year, to see new and interesting protagonist, even form, who knows, Northern countries or Balkans;
- Most importantly, every single clash would be appealing, because if you lose, you go home, this at least from my point of view.

So well, it was just a talk about the format of a football tournament. I described what the main European football competition should be about to be appealing to my personal tastes. Others think differently, the market says what's right offering what the majority wants, and what's right it is not what I do like: so, fair enough, no complains, no big deal, whatever, I'll happily follow or do something else.

[greenbay]

What about a 64 team double knock out format instead of a 32 team group stage until Dezember, to find out who does make it to the round of 16 in February?

Participating teams as per 2015-16 domestic leagues. To make it simple, the better seeded teams wins in every round. To simulate a draw, the seeded teams are sorted in order of coefficient, while the unseeded teams are sorted alphabetically A-Z or Z-A. To make my life more simple, I didn't check for country protection nor "we have met before".

It'll be meaningful knock-out matches from the very first round. More European games for more champions until November/December. And unless complete desaster strikes, the big guns are almost assured 6 games. On contrary, even if some desaster strikes, i.e. Arsenal drawn vs Celtic in round 1 and losing, they are almost sure at least 7 games or even 8 games. See for yourself by checking Celtic's path after a 1st round loss to Arsenal.

.

Playoffs, home and away, August
Champions #26 to #55. Liechtenstein and Kosova, no participation.
Garabag Agdam (13.475) vs Alashkert FC (1.325)
Rosenborg BK (12.850) vs B36 Torshavn (1.975)
FK Astana (12.575) vs Crusaders Belfast (3.400)
Sheriff Tiraspol (10.575) vs Dundalk (2.590)
Red Star Belgrade (7.175) vs FC Santa Coloma (2.699)
Dinamo Tbilisi (5.875) vs Ferencváros (3.475)
FH Hafnarfjardar (5.750) vs FK Liepaja (1.075)
AS Trencín (5.400) vs Flora Tallinn (3.350)
The New Saints (5.200) vs Lincoln Red Imps (1.700)
F91 Dudelange (5.050) vs Mladost Podgorica (2.475)
Zalgiris Vilnius (4.925) vs Partizani Tirana (1.575)
Olimpija Ljubljana (4.625) vs SJK Seinäjoki (1.730)
Valletta FC (4.466) vs Tre Penne (1.316)
Vardar Skopje (4.200) vs Zrinjski Mostar (3.175)

So that's only one round of qualifiying for the main event. Resulting in the big countries still having their 4 teams. Resulting in more countries to have their runners-up and third ranked in the main event. Resulting in 39(!) champions in the main event, all those them with at least 4 games guaranteed for sure. With 6 games practically guaranteed for every top team.

.

1st round, home and away, September
CL titleholders. EL titleholders. Champions #1 to #25. Runners-up #1 to #12. Third-placed #1 to #8. Fourth-placed #1 to #4.
Real Madrid (176.142) vs APOEL Nicosia (35.935)
Bayern München (163.035) vs AS Monaco (36.549)
FC Barcelona (159.142) vs AS Roma (41.587)
Atlético Madrid (144.142) vs AS Trencín (5.400)
Benfica (116.616) vs Astra Giurgiu (11.076)
Paris Saint-Germain (112.549) vs BATE Borisov (34.000)
Borussia Dortmund (110.035) vs Besiktas (34.920)
Juventus (107.087) vs Borussia Mönchengladbach (42.035)
Arsenal (105.256) vs Celtic (40.460)
Manchester City (99.256) vs Dinamo Tbilisi (5.875)
Sevilla (95.642) vs Dinamo Zagreb (25.775)
Zenit St. Petersburg (93.216) vs F91 Dudelange (5.050)
FC Porto (92.616) vs FC København (24.720)
Napoli (90.087) vs FH Hafnarfjardar (5.750)
Bayer Leverkusen (89.035) vs FK Astana (12.575)
FC Basel (87.755) vs FK Rostov (11.716)
Shakhtar Donetsk (81.976) vs Garabag Agdam (13.475)
Tottenham Hotspur (74.256) vs Hapoel Beer-Sheva (4.725)
Olympiakos Piraeus (70.940) vs IFK Norrköping (3.975)
Dinamo Kiev (65.976) vs Legia Warsaw (28.000)
Olympique Lyon (63.049) vs Leicester City (15.256)
Villarreal (60.142) vs Ludogorets Razgrad (25.625)
Internazionale (58.087) vs Olimpija Ljubljana (4.625)
Ajax (58.112) vs Red Star Belgrade (7.175)
PSV Eindhoven (57.112) vs Rosenborg BK (12.850)
Anderlecht (54.000) vs Sheriff Tiraspol (10.575)
Sporting CP Lisbon (51.616) vs The New Saints (5.200)
CSKA Moscow (48.716) vs Valletta FC (4.466)
Viktoria Plzen (44.585) vs Vardar Skopje (4.200)
FC Salzburg (42.520) vs Young Boys (24.755)
Fenerbahçe (40.920) vs Zalgiris Vilnius (4.925)
Club Brugge (43.000) vs Zorya Luhansk (11.976)

.

2nd round, top section, home and away, October
1st round winners
Real Madrid (176.142) vs Ajax (58.112)
Bayern München (163.035) vs Anderlecht (54.000)
FC Barcelona (159.142) vs Club Brugge (43.000)
Atlético Madrid (144.142) vs CSKA Moscow (48.716)
Benfica (116.616) vs Dinamo Kiev (65.976)
Paris Saint-Germain (112.549) vs FC Salzburg (42.520)
Borussia Dortmund (110.035) vs Fenerbahçe (40.920)
Juventus (107.087) vs Internazionale (58.087)
Arsenal (105.256) vs Olympiakos Piraeus (70.940)
Manchester City (99.256) vs Olympique Lyon (63.049)
Sevilla (95.642) vs PSV Eindhoven (57.112)
Zenit St. Petersburg (93.216) vs Shakhtar Donetsk (81.976)
FC Porto (92.616) vs Sporting CP Lisbon (51.616)
Napoli (90.087) vs Tottenham Hotspur (74.256)
Bayer Leverkusen (89.035) vs Viktoria Plzen (44.585)
FC Basel (87.755) vs Villarreal (60.142)

2nd round, bottom section, home and away, October
1st round losers
Borussia Mönchengladbach (42.035) vs AS Trencín (5.400)
AS Roma (41.587) vs Astra Giurgiu (11.076)
Celtic (40.460) vs Dinamo Tbilisi (5.875)
AS Monaco (36.549) vs F91 Dudelange (5.050)
APOEL Nicosia (35.935) vs FH Hafnarfjardar (5.750)
Besiktas (34.920) vs FK Rostov (11.716)
BATE Borisov (34.000) vs Hapoel Beer-Sheva (4.725)
Legia Warsaw (28.000) vs IFK Norrköping (3.975)
Dinamo Zagreb (25.775) vs Olimpija Ljubljana (4.625)
Ludogorets Razgrad (25.625) vs Red Star Belgrade (7.175)
Young Boys (24.755) vs Sheriff Tiraspol (10.575)
FC København (24.720) vs The New Saints (5.200)
Leicester City (15.256) vs Valletta FC (4.466)
Garabag Agdam (13.475) vs Vardar Skopje (4.200)
Rosenborg BK (12.850) vs Zalgiris Vilnius (4.925)
FK Astana (12.575) vs Zorya Luhansk (11.976)

.

3rd round, top section, home and away, November
teams that are 1st & 2nd round winners
Real Madrid (176.142) vs Arsenal (105.256)
Bayern München (163.035) vs Bayer Leverkusen (89.035)
FC Barcelona (159.142) vs FC Basel (87.755)
Atlético Madrid (144.142) vs FC Porto (92.616)
Benfica (116.616) vs Manchester City (99.256)
Paris Saint-Germain (112.549) vs Napoli (90.087)
Borussia Dortmund (110.035) vs Sevilla (95.642)
Juventus (107.087) vs Zenit St. Petersburg (93.216)

3rd round, medium section, home and away, November
teams that are 1st winners & 2nd round losers
Shakhtar Donetsk (81.976) vs Anderlecht (54.000)
Tottenham Hotspur (74.256) vs Club Brugge (43.000)
Olympiakos Piraeus (70.940) vs CSKA Moscow (48.716)
Dinamo Kiev (65.976) vs FC Salzburg (42.520)
Olympique Lyon (63.049) vs Fenerbahçe (40.920)
Villarreal (60.142) vs PSV Eindhoven (57.112)
Internazionale (58.087) vs Sporting CP Lisbon (51.616)
Ajax (58.112) vs Viktoria Plzen (44.585)

3rd round, bottom section, home and away, November
teams that are 1st losers & 2nd round winners
Borussia Mönchengladbach (42.035) vs Dinamo Zagreb (25.775)
AS Roma (41.587) vs FC København (24.720)
Celtic (40.460) vs FK Astana (12.575)
AS Monaco (36.549) vs Garabag Agdam (13.475)
APOEL Nicosia (35.935) vs Leicester City (15.256)
Besiktas (34.920) vs Ludogorets Razgrad (25.625)
BATE Borisov (34.000) vs Rosenborg BK (12.850)
Legia Warsaw (28.000) vs Young Boys (24.755)

So at this stage of the competition, after the same 6 matches as before, the 8 unbeaten teams are qualified for the round of 16. With another 24 one-loss teams having one or two extra matches to compete for the remaining 8 spots in the round of 16. Teams that got their loss in the first round must win two away games. While teams that got their loss as late as the third round, do only need to win one home game.

.

Intermediate round 1, single leg, December
3rd round medium section winners at home vs 3rd round bottom section winners
Shakhtar Donetsk (81.976) vs Legia Warsaw (28.000)
Tottenham Hotspur (74.256) vs Celtic (40.460)
Olympiakos Piraeus (70.940) vs Borussia Mönchengladbach (42.035)
Dinamo Kiev (65.976) vs Besiktas (34.920)
Olympique Lyon (63.049) vs BATE Borisov (34.000)
Villarreal (60.142) vs AS Roma (41.587)
Internazionale (58.087) vs AS Monaco (36.549)
Ajax (58.112) vs APOEL Nicosia (35.935)

Intermediate round 2, single leg, December
3rd round top section losers at home vs Intermediate round 1 winners
Arsenal (105.256) vs Villarreal (60.142)
Manchester City (99.256) vs Tottenham Hotspur (74.256)
Sevilla (95.642) vs Shakhtar Donetsk (81.976)
Zenit St. Petersburg (93.216) vs Olympique Lyon (63.049)
FC Porto (92.616) vs Olympiakos Piraeus (70.940)
Napoli (90.087) vs Internazionale (58.087)
Bayer Leverkusen (89.035) vs Dinamo Kiev (65.976)
FC Basel (87.755) vs Ajax (58.112)

So another 8 one-loss teams have made it to the round of 16. Starting in the round of 16, no more double knock protection. As of now, one aggregate loss gets you out of Europe.

.

Round of 16, home and away, February
3rd round top section winners vs Intermediate round 2 winners
Real Madrid (176.142) vs Zenit St. Petersburg (93.216)
Bayern München (163.035) vs Sevilla (95.642)
FC Barcelona (159.142) vs Napoli (90.087)
Atlético Madrid (144.142) vs Manchester City (99.256)
Benfica (116.616) vs FC Porto (92.616)
Paris Saint-Germain (112.549) vs FC Basel (87.755)
Borussia Dortmund (110.035) vs Bayer Leverkusen (89.035)
Juventus (107.087) vs Arsenal (105.256)

Quarter finals, home and away, March
round of 16 winners
Real Madrid (176.142) vs Paris Saint-Germain (112.549)
Bayern München (163.035) vs Juventus (107.087)
FC Barcelona (159.142) vs Borussia Dortmund (110.035)
Atlético Madrid (144.142) vs Benfica (116.616)

Semi finals, home and away, April
quarter finals winners
Real Madrid (176.142) vs FC Barcelona (159.142)
Bayern München (163.035) vs Atlético Madrid (144.142)

Final, neutral venue, May
semi finals winners
Real Madrid (176.142) vs Bayern München (163.035)

[nemesys]

Ok, give me some time to chew about your idea, but it seems definitely interesting.
It is a "you go out when losing the second time" format, correct?
I remember BadgerBoy (not sure about the spelling, but the nickname was something like that, my apologies if it is spelled wrongly here) proposing a similar idea on forum 1 years ago, and I was in the ones actually liking it.
In any case, if it eliminates or reduces the number of meaningless clashes, it would be welcome on my books.

Little tricky question. So, you remember the 0 2 home 1 3 away vs Inter? (my apologies to max_tre for the sad memories).
I suppose, for a Bayern fan, was quite an epic thing to do, in San Siro, starting from 0 2, am I wrong?
Now, imagine those same clubs (Inter of Mattheus, and that Bayern) in a CL GS today, say match days 3 and 4.
Same exact results. Then they both qualify without problems anyways, but Bayern first just because of that extra goal away.
They face again in QF or SF or Final, and Inter is lucky or plays better, whatever, Mattheus scores, Bayern loses.
What that memorable 3 1 comeback was worth for? Would you remember about it the same way? Would it happen at all?
And even if Bayern wins the cup instead, that memorable match will have little value, teh final will. Instead, I do remember today that match, but I cannot remember who won that uefa cup that year, what the final was... probably it is like ThunderPT says, back then I was more deeply interested about football, so such memories will still stronger, and such matches remembered long term. But I have hard time remembering a match from the GS phases, and label it as "shocking" or "memorable" in the same way as this one; while I do remember few matches in KO phase, which were really interesting to watch and breathtaking, also in recent seasons. Heck! Even that Real Atletico final (the one of Sergio Ramos scoring), which was not a great match football spectacle wise, was appealing to watch just for the mixed emotions it gave and teh dramatic ending!

[greenbay]

It is a "you go out when losing the second time" format, correct?

Well spotted. Like nowadays in group stage, it doesn't hurt to have one stronger opponent in the way. Say above, Arsenal lose to Celtic in round 1. Then in round 2, bottom section, they cannot face a team stronger than - coefficientwise - the likes of Zorya Luhansk. So a 95% sure win. Then in round 3, bottom section, they cannot face a team stronger than - coefficientwise - the likes of Ludogorets Razgrad. A 90% sure win.

In other words, if it's not a 64 double knock out format, but a 64 team group stage, then it's like Arsenal being drawn in a walk in the park group with Celtic, Zorya and Ludogerets. Only with one twist. Making only runners-up in such super-soft group, doesn't qualify you for R16 automatically any more. Only for some kind of R32, which I labelled as intermediate round. For obvious reasons as it's 16 groups, not only 8.

[nemesys]

Well spotted. Like nowadays in group stage, it doesn't hurt to have one stronger opponent in the way. Say above, Arsenal lose to Celtic in round 1. Then in round 2, bottom section, they cannot face a team stronger than - coefficientwise - the likes of Zorya Luhansk. So a 95% sure win. Then in round 3, bottom section, they cannot face a team stronger than - coefficientwise - the likes of Ludogorets Razgrad. A 90% sure win.

In other words, if it's not a 64 double knock out format, but a 64 team group stage, then it's like Arsenal being drawn in a walk in the park group with Celtic, Zorya and Ludogerets. Only with one twist. Making only runners-up in such super-soft group, doesn't qualify you for R16 automatically any more. Only for some kind of R32, which I labelled as intermediate round. For obvious reasons as it's 16 groups, not only 8.

Nice format. Under a purely mathematical/logic stand point, under a entertainment (personal opinion) stand point, and under a sport merit and (if I get it correctly) "all 64 clubs start at round 1" stand point. I doubt this would ever be introduced (for several reasons we don't need to list again), yet I do like it way more than what we have today. Just one second chance, sounds also cool to have, after all. And still wasting it doesn't make sense, so no meaning less matches anyways. Truly a nice compromise.

Last anecdotal little silly note: when younger I played few (very low level) "second loss you are out" indoor football tournaments, and they were definitely fun to play. You lose, the next opponent will be weaker (on paper at least), so that the morale doesn't go to low, you have a further chance to show something better in the other match, and you don't feel unlucky about having a really nasty draw in round 1 (like the future champions, for instance); but if you lose again, then it is game over, and well, at that point, you accept it without regrets and without sadness: you recognize that in that tournament several opponents were better (facts on pitch say so), and you must give credit to them at such point, and going home seems fully fair and understandable. So, from the little such experiences can be worth, it should be fun to play also for the protagonists involved, I guess. For me, it was more fun and engaging to play, than, for instance, longer tournaments with double round robin. This is just about personal taste probably, of course.

[max tre]

my apologies to max_tre for the sad memories

Nah, you don't need to: 1- I wasn't even born, then I have no "memory" at all about that (but ofc I have knowledge of those matches, including the Nicolino's coast-to-coast goal), 2- I have more recent happy memories about Bayern (the last happy ones, sadly).


Btw, I can see the bugylibicska's Swiss system proposal more suitable here. But it's only on the paper.

[nemesys]

Btw, I can see the bugylibicska's Swiss system proposal more suitable here. But it's only on the paper.

We are now talking just for the sake of academy, and about personal format preferences, so everything goes, and preferences varies from subject to subject. Swiss model is too much "league oriented, and close to round robin" for my tastes about the major European club football competition, so I honestly would prefer a "second loss you are out" system myself, if a pure 2 legs KO system is not an option. But I can see the merits of such format as well (also if I did not dig too much into it), at least it would be something about meaningless matches (assuming that I understood it correctly).

[Aliceag]

How would a model of "3rd loss you're out" works in pure KO formats? That would guarantee minimum 6 games to everyone. It should be made that the 2nd loss would imply the team can no longer win CL, but instead relegated to aspire EL title.

Thunder, I mentioned what fans wanted not what clubs wanted. Fans want more games. Fans would like their team to play twice or thrice a week every week, even if clubs think that's not manageable. I bet fans would like a model with domestic league on weekends and european competitions and cups midweek every week and their teams playing 70 games per season. And probably it would bring more revenue. This is not implemented probably because increasing the games in such amount would also increase the expenses much more due to having double squad sizes, more staff, more logistics, and not maximizing stadium attendances, etc, to a point where the expenses would cut the increased revenenue and thus profit would be lower. There has to be a optimum number of games to maximize profit and probably models are adjusting to that variable.

[Overgame]

Triple ko tournament.

First bracket, teams with no loss. The losers are sent to the second bracket, at the same round, if you lose in quarters, you are sent in quarters in the second bracket. The winner is qualified for the big final.
Second bracket, teams with one loss. The losers are sent to the third bracket, same round. The winner of the second bracket play a game against the winner of the first bracket. If they win, we have 2 teams with 1 loss qualified for the big final, if they lose, the winner of the first bracket wins the tournament.
Third bracket is EL.

[dnina10]

What about a 64 team double knock out format instead of a 32 team group stage until Dezember, to find out who does make it to the round of 16 in February. To make it simple, the better seeded teams wins in every round. To simulate a draw, the seeded teams are sorted in order of coefficient, while the unseeded teams are sorted alphabetically A-Z or Z-A. To make my life more simple, I didn't check for country protection nor "we have met before".

It'll be meaningful knock-out matches from the very first round. More European games for more champions until November/December. And unless complete desaster strikes, the big guns are almost assured 6 games. On contrary, even if some desaster strikes, i.e. Arsenal drawn vs Celtic in round 1 and losing, they are almost sure at least 7 games or even 8 games. See for yourself by checking Celtic's path after a 1st round loss to Arsenal.

This is not a bad idea. This would level the playing field. San Marino has their playoffs set up like this, with double elimination. As long as there's a point in which double elimination stops, I am for this. Also, they should make sure that each country is well represented, and not just the top 5 nations