Coefficient calculation principles 21/22 onwards?

[eye]

It is not very clear but probably the reason that they didn't explain it further is cause it is impossible to happen with the current format.

If coeffient system remains same and they use the same text most likely bonus points are extra points to the minimum. At paragraph 4.3 they are explaining the points gained at matches and at paragraph 5 they are explaining about bonuses which probably means that the minimum points are not involved with bonuses. If they have added at paragraph 4.3 the bonus points for the 1st and 2nd club of group then probably minimum would be calculated after bonus had be given. That's what I understand.

As for your example is it possible a club to finish 24th just winning 1 of 8 matches? Have you checked it? At ECL it might be possible since there are only 6 matches

[amirbachar]

It is not very clear but probably the reason that they didn't explain it further is cause it is impossible to happen with the current format.

If coeffient system remains same and they use the same text most likely bonus points are extra points to the minimum. At paragraph 4.3 they are explaining the points gained at matches and at paragraph 5 they are explaining about bonuses which probably means that the minimum points are not involved with bonuses. If they have added at paragraph 4.3 the bonus points for the 1st and 2nd club of group then probably minimum would be calculated after bonus had be given. That's what I understand.

As for your example is it possible a club to finish 24th just winning 1 of 8 matches? Have you checked it? At ECL it might be possible since there are only 6 matches

Theoretically I belive it would be possible to finish 24 with 1 point, maybe even 0, depends on the specific schedule.

[Fotcalc]

As for your example is it possible a club to finish 24th just winning 1 of 8 matches? Have you checked it? At ECL it might be possible since there are only 6 matches

Thank you. I haven't checked it.

[Fotcalc]

@eye, do you mean that if the regulations are the same as this season, Valur would recieve these points next season (example season):


...And if the group stage bonus points are also in paragraph 4.3, they would recieve this (example season)


*I assume that the bonus points for 24th is 2.

Valur was a bad example, but you get the point

[As_Contas_do_Título]

It is not very clear but probably the reason that they didn't explain it further is cause it is impossible to happen with the current format.

If coeffient system remains same and they use the same text most likely bonus points are extra points to the minimum. At paragraph 4.3 they are explaining the points gained at matches and at paragraph 5 they are explaining about bonuses which probably means that the minimum points are not involved with bonuses. If they have added at paragraph 4.3 the bonus points for the 1st and 2nd club of group then probably minimum would be calculated after bonus had be given. That's what I understand.

As for your example is it possible a club to finish 24th just winning 1 of 8 matches? Have you checked it? At ECL it might be possible since there are only 6 matches

Theoretically I belive it would be possible to finish 24 with 1 point, maybe even 0, depends on the specific schedule.

No. It's totally impossible, either for EL or CoL.

An example (very theoretical):

Molde win one match in UEL in the 24/25 season, but still end 24th. That will give them 2 points for the win and maybe 2 bonus points for the 24th place.

The question now is if they will recieve...

- 1 more point from the guranteed minimum (to achieve 3 points in total when excluding the 2 bonus points).
or
- 0 points from the guaranteed minimum because they have recieved 4 points in total (4 is above the guaranteed minimum of 3).

That is also impossible for EL. Could eventually be possible for CoL, depending on the schedule, but most probably will not, also.

[As_Contas_do_Título]

It is not very clear but probably the reason that they didn't explain it further is cause it is impossible to happen with the current format.

If coeffient system remains same and they use the same text most likely bonus points are extra points to the minimum. At paragraph 4.3 they are explaining the points gained at matches and at paragraph 5 they are explaining about bonuses which probably means that the minimum points are not involved with bonuses. If they have added at paragraph 4.3 the bonus points for the 1st and 2nd club of group then probably minimum would be calculated after bonus had be given. That's what I understand.

As for your example is it possible a club to finish 24th just winning 1 of 8 matches? Have you checked it? At ECL it might be possible since there are only 6 matches

Theoretically I belive it would be possible to finish 24 with 1 point, maybe even 0, depends on the specific schedule.

No. It's totally impossible, either for EL or CoL.

An example (very theoretical):

Molde win one match in UEL in the 24/25 season, but still end 24th. That will give them 2 points for the win and maybe 2 bonus points for the 24th place.

The question now is if they will recieve...

- 1 more point from the guranteed minimum (to achieve 3 points in total when excluding the 2 bonus points).
or
- 0 points from the guaranteed minimum because they have recieved 4 points in total (4 is above the guaranteed minimum of 3).

That is also impossible for EL. Could eventually be possible for CoL, depending on the schedule, but most probably will not, also.

I was not considering a very specific schedule, that is where the 36 teams are divided in two sub-groups of 18, with all teams playing only teams from the other sub-group (in that case, all those situations were possible). But I'm sure they will not have a schedule like that.

EDIT: No, even that schedule would not be possible in EL (but could possibly be in CoL), as teams from each pot should be divided equally in each of the 2 sub-groups, but there is an odd number of teams in each pot, 9 (in the CoL, on the other hand, there will be 6 pots of 6).

[eye]

@Fotcalc yes that's what I believe it happens based on how it is written at regulations.

[amirbachar]

Theoretically I belive it would be possible to finish 24 with 1 point, maybe even 0, depends on the specific schedule.

No. It's totally impossible, either for EL or CoL.

An example (very theoretical):

Molde win one match in UEL in the 24/25 season, but still end 24th. That will give them 2 points for the win and maybe 2 bonus points for the 24th place.

The question now is if they will recieve...

- 1 more point from the guranteed minimum (to achieve 3 points in total when excluding the 2 bonus points).
or
- 0 points from the guaranteed minimum because they have recieved 4 points in total (4 is above the guaranteed minimum of 3).

That is also impossible for EL. Could eventually be possible for CoL, depending on the schedule, but most probably will not, also.

I was not considering a very specific schedule, that is where the 36 teams are divided in two sub-groups of 18, with all teams playing only teams from the other sub-group (in that case, all those situations were possible). But I'm sure they will not have a schedule like that.

EDIT: No, even that schedule would not be possible in EL (but could possibly be in CoL), as teams from each pot should be divided equally in each of the 2 sub-groups, but there is an odd number of teams in each pot, 9 (in the CoL, on the other hand, there will be 6 pots of 6).

There are also other cases in between where it is possible to finish 24th with 1 point. It would be interesting to calculate it after the schedule is set (using max-flow min-cut therom)

[As_Contas_do_Título]

Looking deeper into the matter, there is another schedule possibility, which, contrary to the one I explained before, can be used in EL (and CL). I was explaining it in detail when I received a phone call, and after that, the page refreshed and I lost all I've written and I'm not in the mood to write it all again, but let's say that it allows even a team to end 22nd with zero points. Still, I personally don't think they'll use a schedule like this. And, for the vast majority of the schedule possibilities, that situation would be far from possible.

[Fotcalc]

@kassiesa
There something I don't understand. Why is for example Hamburger SV and Nottingham F. unranked on UEFA's 10-year ranking. They have title points, but is still unranked. What if their title points were like 40? What would happen if they suddenly joined the UCL group stage? This matters to their 10-year coefficient payment? (Very theoretical question).

The reason for why I ask, is because it makes more sense to me, to include all the clubs with title points in the 10-year ranking, even though they haven't participated in a looooong time.

Edit: Also, what if Real Madrid has a 10 year break from Europe. What would happen the season they come back ?

[Fotcalc]

In conclusion, the central question is:
If Real Madrid has a 10 year break from Europe, but then qualify for the UCL. Will they use their title points for that season, or start like any other new Spanish club (using 20% of Spains coefficient points)?

[Juliusz]

@kassiesa
There something I don't understand. Why is for example Hamburger SV and Nottingham F. unranked on UEFA's 10-year ranking. They have title points, but is still unranked. What if their title points were like 40? What would happen if they suddenly joined the UCL group stage? This matters to their 10-year coefficient payment? (Very theoretical question).

The reason for why I ask, is because it makes more sense to me, to include all the clubs with title points in the 10-year ranking, even though they haven't participated in a looooong time.

Edit: Also, what if Real Madrid has a 10 year break from Europe. What would happen the season they come back ?

10-year coefficient is a sum of sporting coefficient points and title points.

Look at an example of IFK Göteborg.

They collected 5 sporting points in last 10 seasons (including the current one) and 2 title points for having won two UEFA Cups in the past.

Their sum of points is 7.000 which is lower than 20% of Sweden's 10-year coefficient (8.440).

But after 2018/19 season, they had 6 sporting points and 2 title points which resulted in a total of 8.000. This was more than 20% of Sweden's coefficient (7.445).

So I understand that a club can have 0 sporting points and several title points and it's the matter if it is more than 20% of country coefficient or not. In example of Real Madrid, title points would be enough to have more points than the 20%.

[Fotcalc]

So I understand that a club can have 0 sporting points and several title points and it's the matter if it is more than 20% of country coefficient or not. In example of Real Madrid, title points would be enough to have more points than the 20%.

This is how I understand what you are saying:

Let’s say Real Madrid and for example Real Betis have a ten year break from Europe, but then join UEL. Real Madrid would not use the 20% of Spains coefficient. Instead Real Madrid would use their own coefficient points (title points). As a result, Real Madrid would probably earn a lot more than Real Betis from the 10-year coefficient bonus, even though both clubs are UNRANKED.

Do you agree with this?

[Juliusz]

So I understand that a club can have 0 sporting points and several title points and it's the matter if it is more than 20% of country coefficient or not. In example of Real Madrid, title points would be enough to have more points than the 20%.

This is how I understand what you are saying:

Let’s say Real Madrid and for example Real Betis have a ten year break from Europe, but then join UEL. Real Madrid would not use the 20% of Spains coefficient. Instead Real Madrid would use their own coefficient points (title points). As a result, Real Madrid would probably earn a lot more than Real Betis from the 10-year coefficient bonus, even though both clubs are UNRANKED.

Do you agree with this?

Yes. Real Madrid would have 94.000 points and Betis would have 20% of Spanish country coefficient.

I think that was the purpose of title points - to provide higher revenue for top clubs even if they fail on the pitch.

[Fotcalc]

Thank you. Accoring to that, it makes a lot of sense to include all UNRANKED clubs in the 10-year ranking, when they have more than 20% of NA coefficient points.

For example, including Nottingham Forest in the 31/32 ranking makes a lot of sense. I haven't given them a ranking, since they are unranked, but it still shows that they wouldn't have 20% of the NAs coefficient points. Very theoretical, but still makes sense.