Just had a look at a rather interesting post on Bert Kassies' forum about how the draw and seedings for next seasons Champions League would turn out if they were using the new set-up (the one that'll be used a year later).

Basically, r*ngers would be a seeded team in the first CL qualifier round to be drawn against one of the following: Anderlecht, Spartak Moscow, Sparta Prague, Dinamo Kiev or Twente Enschede.

If/when they got through that, they'd then remain seeded for the next round, where the likely unseeded teams are: Steaua Bucaresti, Panathinaikos, Fenerbahce, Fiorentina and Atletico Madrid.

Now this is do-able. But had Celtic finished second, this is what would have happened:
We would have been seeded for round 1, but round 2, we'd have been unseeded. We'd have faced one of: Liverpool, Benfica, Schalke, Olympique Marseille or Steaua B.

And that's just one season. The way the draw is worked, the top3 countries 4th placed team and 4/5th countries 3rd team will play the winners of play-offs between the next best from countries 6-15. Basically this means that unless you have a good solid run in the Uefa Cup to boost your points (like r*ngers and Celtic previously) you're going to be pitted against teams like: Liverpool, Werder Bremen, Roma, Marseille and Sevilla every single year, just to get to the Champions League.

Either that or make damn sure you win your League.

This is exactly what I said at the time. The SPL were quick to rush to UEFA's praise when the new format gave Scotland a guarenteed Group-stage place for the SPL Winner. Problem was, the con that resulted from that pro was the splitting of the qualifying rounds into 'Big Countries' and 'Wee Countries'. This will make it much harder for the SPL Runner-Up to get to the Group-stage in future.

As regards the co-efficient - the new format means that we can afford to 'drop' down to 12th:
http://www.xs4all.nl/~kassiesa/bert/uefa/access2009.html
without any change to the number of teams and what rounds. The big problem is that if our rating falls, while others rise (think of Ukraine, Russia, Romania, all improving) then we may fall below 12th. That would likely start several years of spiralling down - earlier rounds, more eliminations, less teams - which would be akin to the bad situation we suffered from during much of the 1990s.

I'm not too sure about us falling much further than 12th. Teams from countries down to 15th get a guaranteed minimum of 2 ties, 1 in the Champions League and 1 in the Uefa Cup. The likelihood of either Celtic or Rangers getting knocked out of the CL having successfully negotiated their first round of qualifiers is pretty high. If this happens they go straight into the Uefa Cup group stages (and beyond?).

In the past, the Uefa Cup has been the easier hunting ground for both teams, indeed many teams, when it comes to picking up coefficient points. I think this would be our saving grace.

What would be better, though, would be a regular 6 or 7 points from Scotland's 3rd team. It's very unfortunate that we seem to be lacking any single club that is able to consolidate a high league position whilst competing in Europe. This has led to most of the '3rd teams' competing in Europe on an irregular basis, losing them much needed coeff points to obtain a seeding in Round 1 (or Q3 & 4 season after next)

I agree. Aberdeen pulled their weight this season, but prior to this Hibs, Dundee Utd, Dundee, Hearts, as well as various lower-league teams, all failed to step up to the plate and win enough.

We got through a round and got beat by a side from Serie A hardly a disgrace by any means, perhaps Gretna would of been a better example than us.

Err, you got through a qualifier that didn't add any direct co-eff points to your tally, which was the point I was making and you only added 2 points to the coeff total, which is the point HibeeJibee was making.

Fair enough.

I couldn't of told you how many points we got for getting in the 1st round.

Surely Hearts put some points on the board for making the group stage or do the real points come from making it out the other side like the Dons?

Points come more from winning/drawing games opposed to progressing rounds. Hearts managed 1 win / 3 losses in the UEFA Cup group-stage. Their Champions League season was even worse...

Whether or not we won enough is up to you but to be drawn against a team in the Serie A and go out gracefully is good enough for a team outside the OF in fact I think that it was a fantastic achievment in the first place!

Fair enough we never got a lot of co-effiecent points on the board as some people would like but come on a team in the SPL getting put out by a team in the Serie A is no shame!

OK, you drew a team from a decent country. That doesn't change the fact it contributed nothing.

Fair enough but there is a pattern with the sides that have given nothing.

Dundee, United, Gretna, Hibs and no doubt Queens next year. All given a spot because they lost the cup final.

...although in some cases the team had also finished 3rd or 4th in the SPL. (Can add Dunfermline to the list, twice). I would advocate abolishing the cup runner-up slot - in a small country like we live in, with an unseeded cup where the top division teams join in the last 32, it is unjustified. Problem is, it is not up to us - UEFA decide - and there is no guarentee they will grant the request.

Another issue we'll have to contend with regarding next season's European co-efficient is that we will have five teams instead of four this year (unless Hibs get through the IT of course). Obviously it's good to have more Scottish teams playing in Europe for the fans, our league's status and extra cash coming into the game. However, it also means all co-efficient points earned will be split five ways instead of four. So, at the moment an average season sees the OF win the vast majority of Scotland's points with the other two entrants doing badly. Last season was particularly good because Aberdeen did much better than expected and Rangers reached a final.

However, in order to stay in the top 12 countries we'll need all five teams from next year to score a decent number of points. The only plus side is that other countries will also get extra places so will have to raise their game too, but I suspect at the moment that the likes of Motherwell, Hibs, Dundee, Hearts and Aberdeen (despite their efforts last year) are a bit lacking in ability and certainly European experience to put runs together.

That said, I'm always optimistic, so fingers crossed Motherwell get the easiest possible draw this year and in future years we can see at least one SPL team each season getting into the UEFA group stages with big European nights against teams from England, Germany, Spain and Italy to look forward to and causing a few surprises along the way...

It is the luck of the draw, if we faced a small norwegian team or another Albanian team then we would have progresssed. However we were drawn against a particularly good Serie A team (At that time) which except the OF no team in Scotland would have been faviourites to progress!

You were unseeded in the first round proper so you couldn't have faced a small Norwegian team or another Albanian team.

Our biggest problem with our 'other' teams is that they play so irregularly in Europe that they rarely get the chance to be seeded in the early rounds. With 5 places, this gives our 3rd or 4th team a greater chance to at least play in Europe 3 or 4 times out of 5 years. This leads to an increased likelihood of seeding, which in turn increases the likelihood of progression.

The countries around us at the moment (Turkey, Netherlands, Portugal, Ukraine) all have more than 2 teams that play almost every year in Europe. This has allowed them to build up, initially, small amounts of coeff points, which in turn (after 4 or 5 years) gives them a seeded spot in round 1 of the Uefa Cup. This means the next year they play, instead of scraping a win and two points v Austria Vienna (eg) they get to pump 8 goals past some hapless Lithuanian outfit (no, not that one) and get 4 points and another 4 games.

An example of this may be shown over the next few years where Aberdeen's 6 point helps them close in on a seeded place if/when they next get to the first round proper.

My biggest gripe with the new system is that Uefa have now made the Uefa Cup's qualifying into 4 rounds prior to the group stage. This means that if/when a team gets knocked out in the final qualifying round, they've in fact gathered no co-eff points for themselves other than the kickback from the country coefficient.

However, having said all that (nonsense, mainly), it's often just simply a case of having to beat a seeded team to take that next step (like Celtic v Ajax in 2001)

The luck of the draw has an influence on it obviously, you sometimes get the easier seeded teams, and in Dundees case, a harder one. Now even though how they performed was admirable for their club, for Scotland on a whole it didn't do any favours.

The teams fighting 3rd/4th/5th in Scotland changes so much from year to year, none of the clubs can get themselves into Europe enough to get some points on their own personal board. Which after enough gained would see them seeded for an easier draw, and allowing them to avoid the big guns. My fear this year for the Queens, is they are going to get the likes of Milan, who lets face it the OF would get beaten by over 2 legs as well (no disrespect to Celtics effort obviously, but Milan are still a better side than the OF).

As for the CL, when it does come to this, we really are gonna have to get used to just 1 side in the CL group, and the other in UEFA, which is gonna hit massively on the side not in the CL, due to income. This isn't in any shape or form, a benefit to the countries who are getting one or two sides into the CL. It's a handycap. Sure they will say its good for the likes of the real diddy countries (Nothern Ireland/ROI), Latvia etc. It hits hard on the clubs who have a chance of catching the big teams with a little help from UEFA. After all, these clubs even with the new seeding procedure, are all still gonna qualify, and its gonna be them again who rake in all the money which is tried to stop.

Their argument will be taken on by Scotland as well, I mean for European football, watching the OF Vs Milan/Inter/Barca/Real/Man U/Arsenal etc is alot better than watching them pump Glentoran 7 or 8 nothing in the proper group stages.

Countries like Scotland/Russia/Belgium/Ukraine/Portugal, were all too quick and keen to grab the new idea before thinking of the long term costs and benefits, the costs for the SPL, certainly outway the benefits.

...and that’s what it comes down to at the end of the day. For all the talk of co-efficients and seedings, if you can’t beat the team put in front of you then you get knocked out and deservedly so.

It can go both ways as well.

Celtic were seeded last time round I believe and still had to play Spartak Moscow, who were a good side. There were easier (and of course harder) draws available had Celtic been unseeded.

As has been mentioned, we were unseeded against Ajax and won through where as we were knocked out as seeds vs Basel.

Also of course, we were miles away the top seeds in QR2 in 2005/06 but that didn’t stop us from being on the receiving end of utter humiliation at the hands of Artmedia. My worst ever night as a Celtic fan.

To be honest, I don't think we really want more than five teams for the foreseeable future - the best thing will be one of the OF going straight into the CL, with the other one hopefully seeded in the final qualifying round to give them the best chance of making it two. Then three of the stronger SPL teams battling it out to get into the UEFA group stages. I believe you get half points for qualifying matches so all these teams can contribute by winning the matches they *should* win, and hopefully at least one can make it through to the group stages every year. If we do that we should be able to maintain our top 12 spot.

In the long term I guess all the top non OF teams (as in top four behind the OF) should be looking to gain European experience and hopefully become more of a recognised force in Europe. It would be nice to see the likes of Aberdeen, Dundee Utd and the two Edinburgh clubs getting to the group stages and having games against the likes of Fiorentina, Everton, Villareal etc on a fairly regular basis.

The problem with that is that these qualifying rounds points are accumulated for the country (and provides a 33% kickback of that, to each club) but does not directly contribute to the club's coefficient other than said kickback. To put it into a bit of perspective, Aberdeen would have got two-thirds of the points they did this season, assuming they managed to negotiate the additional round prior to the group stage.

It also means that where previously a win in the first round (or round prior to group stage) gained two points for the club, a similar win prior to the group stage will earn the club a massive total of 0.067 points (33% of country coeff divided by five). How shit is that for the clubs really struggling to take that next step?

I shit you not, what Uefa have done here is close the 'real' rounds of European competition to the have-nots. If you're not seeded now or next year, you're f*cked.

Just reading that is bizarre. We`ll probably get Surreal Madrid next season at this rate.

I agree up to a point, but in Scotland's case we can't really complain about being unlucky. Other than Aberdeen's run last year no non-OF clubs have done anything to improve their own seeding in the last 10 years. I still think it will come down to luck of the draw each year - there will always be a handful of seeded teams that you would hope the likes of Aberdeen/Hibs/Dundee Utd would have a chance of beating and even a few that they would be big underdogs to, but still might over-perform and get through. Obviously there will also be totally unwinnable draws against AC Milan etc.

The main thing is that Scottish teams outwith the Old Firm have to find ways of improving - partly through developing really good young players, partly by having better scouting for really good cheap foreign players and through top quality managers who can put out a team of underdogs and get them to play to a system that uses Scottish teams' strengths. Easy eh?

I never said we've been unlucky. I actually feel the opposite. This past year both Celtic and r*ngers rode their luck in Europe on more than one occasion.

The 'other' Scottish teams, on the other hand, have been downright abysmal over the years in Europe. It's pretty shocking that it's only ever once every two or three years that our 3rd team manages to get anything more than a couple of points (or a win or two draws etc)

Yep - agree with all of that. I think the 'others' tend to suffer from lack of confidence against any decent-sounding European teams and over-confidence against the ones no one has heard of. They should be treating early round games like matches against the OF or big Scottish Cup games and the matches against bigger names they should focus on playing to their strengths and not be overawed.

It was good to see Aberdeen actually playing some nice football in a few of their Euro games. Teams like Motherwell and Hibs shouldn't massively change the way they play just because they're drawn against a French or Dutch mid-table side who aren't any better than either of the Old Firm.

A think their is now a great amount of pressure on Motherwell to have a good european campaign and help scotland to be a bigger force in the european competitions
its nt just down to the old firm to put scottish football on the map

i agree about the last sentence, but i think the pressure is not really high - in fact nobody, especially nobody foreign, expects that motherwell can achieve something, so they have a good underdog position and i think thats very good for them
the well proved last season that they are quite good, but any european opponent would underestimate them, and that could be a great chance

Totally agree. Motherwell can, and indeed should, be able to raise their game and surprise almost any team in the 1st round (most of which would be hard pushed to beat Celtic or r*ngers). If Motherwell can raise their game to beat us then they can surely do so in Europe and ebat the likes of Brondby?

Hopefully they can steer clear of Milan until the group stages.

For me, a lot of the failure of clubs outside the top two - and indeed, many of the failures of Celtic and Rangers themselves - has been related to the type of football played at the time. Moreso than in the Premiership or the SPL, the continent generally demands the ability to play a bit of football. I say generally because of the obvious example of Rangers last season, but I still believe this holds true.

Aberdeen had a great season in Europe last year because when it counted, they could get the ball down and play it. Against both Copenhagen and Bayern Munich at Pittodrie, you'd never have believed you were watching the same Aberdeen who were thrashed 5-1 against Celtic and looked utterly bereft of ideas. They were capable of stringing telling passes together and working great defences and, in the case of Rensing more than Christiansen anyway, forcing a good keeper to pick the ball out of his own net.

I think Motherwell will be ok in Europe, because they have that ability to play the ball that perhaps the likes of Gretna, Dunfermline and even Hearts under Levein and Ivanauskas have lacked in previous seasons. Certainly I can't see them disgracing themselves against weaker opposition, as an ability to play football usually overcomes the gap between team's level of talent.

Hope you're right about Motherwell - as has already been said, most of the teams in the first round will not be as good as the Old Firm (with a couple of obvious exceptions), so they just need the confidence in themselves to go out and play well. Wouldn't hurt if they got the easiest draw possible though!

I agree with Gallacticos about being able to get the ball down and play being really important. Aberdeen pleasantly surprised me with some of their football in last season's UEFA Cup. I also think teams are a bit more tactically aware now too - Scottish teams in the 90s went into games playing pretty much the same way they did in the league only to get caught on the break or lose on away goals.

Rangers took playing to a system a bit too far last year (although it certainly worked for them until the final), but I actually think they had the right idea when facing a much better team to play 4-5-1 - I just objected to them playing so defensively in home games and against the poorer teams.

Hopefully with a bit of luck, some decent passing football, lots of traditional Scottish 'spirit' and sensible tactics Motherwell will be able to get us a few co-efficient points.

Well it didn’t prove to be important for us to qualify for the last 16 of the CL.

a suppose a mean look at the Dons last year
and if they are able step up to the european stage they may cause some upsets

I think the answer to my original question is 'Very'.

Not hard Celtic and Rangers always pick themselves up after slumps in form. If Celtic continue the way they are and Rangers improve, both could get in easily.

Did you have an actual read of my original post? This is not about Rangers being pish at the moment - it's about the new set-up for Champions League qualifying; it's about to get very hard for the Old Firm. The qualifying will see them placed in a draw with teams from Portugal, Netherlands England, Spain, Italy, Germany, France etc.

No more 'easy' ties against Kaunas and Spartak.

Maybe i didn't read it

As for Spartak, there football was brilliant they passed us off the park many a time and were a joy to watch.

I was making a point when using them - that is the level of team that one half of the Old Firm will now hope to draw as the 'easy' team from next season

edit: This post also assumes that the Old Firm will continue the duopoly.

To be honest, only having one CL place wouldn't bother me. In fact, I'd probably prefer it.

This is exactly right. The team which finishes 2nd in the SPL will, from next season, have to beat the likes of Arsenal/Barcelona/Juventus/Marseille/Schalke/Shakhar/Spartak Moscow/Galatasaray (all seeded teams in the current QR3, and from major nations) to qualify for the group-stage. For that reason, it may be some time - or very long time - before we've 2 teams in the groups again.

The whole thing now is a viscious cycle perpetuated by UEFA to protect the "big league" clubs i.e. teams from the Premiership Serie A, la Liga and the Bundesliga.

The lower down the rankings you are, the harder it is to sustain a decent run in either the CL of UEFA Cup, thereby making it even harder to climb the rankings.

And that suits UEFA just fine. Who do you think they'd rather have had in last season's UEFA Cup final? Rangers v Zenit of the likes of Spurs v Bayern? Who would they have made more money from in terms of TV revenue and sponsorship?

Unless you come from Italy, England, Spain or Germany UEFA don't give a toss. They throw the likes of Scotland, Russia, Portugal and Holland the scraps from the table and expect us to be happy because they occasionally let us play with the big boys.

In the days of the European Cup Napoli were once drawn against Real Madrid in the first round. The champions of Italy against the champions of Spain, in the FIRST round! Would that happen now? Would it buggery. Keep all the big clubs apart for as long as possible. How can that be considered sporting?

Surely the idea of "competition" is that every competitor has an equal chance. That just isn't the case with UEFA. The more powerful leagues are given more entrants and are deliberately kept apart so that their route to the latter stages is easier!

Christ, give the SPL 8 european places and draw them against "weaker" opponants in every round, even by the law of averages 2 or 3 would make it to the quarter finals!

How hard will it be for Scotland to get 2 teams in the Champions League group stages? Impossible. UEFA will make damn sure of it.

However to give them their due, the still retain the system whereby a win in a UEFA Cup tie gathers the same co-efficient points as a win in a CL tie. They could easily change this and make the gap even larger.

Not that hard considering the draw that Rangers got (And would have had if they beat Hearts feeder team)

Only people to blame are Walter Smith & the Rangers players......

For this season no question. But should Rangers even have had to play that tie? The teams in 3rd and 4th in England, Spain and Italy start tonight, in the 3rd qualifying round. Now I'm not claiming for a second that the runners-up of the SPL are stronger than those 6 teams but surely starting in the same round would be more realistic.

Having said that, it could be worse. Outside of the top 11 ranked countries the league champions start before the lucky 6! How in God's name cna the competition be called the Champions League when there are teams finishing 4th in their domestic league who have a better chance of making the group stage than the national champions of 42 other countries? How can UEFA possible claim to be trying to help the smaller countries when they appear to be doing everything possible to keep the smaller teams out of the Champions League?

Don't think for a second I'm some bitter hun choking on sour grapes because Rangers got knocked out by Kaunus. What I am is a bitter Scotsman sick to the back teeth of seeing the same "Premiership best league in the world" bullshit every time the Champions League starts. Sick to the back teeth of seeing Scottish teams facing rediculous odds just trying to get a decent run in Europe.

Let's be honest, the odds are stacked against Scottish clubs before the season even kicks off in Europe. The SPL isn't one of the "glamour" leagues, it doesn't have the same TV pulling power as the Premiership or La Liga. Is that really any reason to send our clubs to eastern European backwaters every August, in the vain hope of making some progress?

The Champions League and UEFA Cup aren't about competition any more, they're about money. If you don't have it, you're not going to get anywhere.

Could be worse. You could be an East European team sent to a Sco...

Which team was sent to Eastern Europe this season? Were they the league champions? Who killed Laura Palmer?

This isn't the reason it has been done. The reason UEFA have changed it is to make more money. How they've managed this is explained here

To me this is one of the worst things to happen top football in recent years. This is going to destroy competition in most of the mid sized countries. It's not just Scotland that will probably only have one team each year but Portugal, Romania, Ukraine, Turkey, the Netherlands as well. And it's likely to be the same team every year. The Champions League is such a money spinner and whoever gets the money (and the pulling power of Champions League football) will have a huge advantage over their opponents and so will win the title again the next year and get more money and win the title again and so on and so on. 

Even in the countries where a spot isn't guaranteed the same thing is likely to happen. In the champions qualifying section it's probable that the teams who qualify for the group stages will be from the same countries each year so those leagues will also be massively distorted. 

Exactly the point I was (rather long-windedly admittedly!) trying to make.

The only way a team can afford to buy the players required to make any progress in Europe is to.... make progress in Europe!

If you don't make the Champions League and make £X million chances are you're not going to have the funds available to invest in players and make the Champions League the following year.

Glad somone else finds the system as unfair as I do.