IceCoolSuperStud

European Super League Proposals. I read with interest about the modern proposals for a European Super League. But I think the idea of having 16 teams, with guaranteed places for some sides is totally wrong and unacceptable. It is a cartel of dominant clubs, and nations, locking out other challengers, agains the spirit of competition. This idea of the present big clubs being guaranteed a place in the European Super League for 20 years is disgusting, corrupt, and a disgrace. Unfair on small nations and clubs in the big nations outside the elite clubs who want to join the elite. Why should the big nations be guaranteed places in the the league, with small nations kept out? This will further entrench big nations as having a dominant monopoly affect on Europe. If the big clubs are good enough, then they should proove it by qualifying for the Super League, each season? If they are not good enough, that is their fault, and should not be ensured a place they do not deserve. Queens Park, of Glasgow, Scotland, were once one of the top sides in World football, does that mean they should be guaranteed a place in the European Super League, because they were good in the 19th century? How would you feel if the big nations were guaranteed places in the World Cup? Or with Brazil or Germany, ensured a place in the Quarter Final, for the next 20 years? It is nonsense. Or if Roger Federer was guaranteed a place in Wimbledon for the next 20 years, regardless of his ability? Or if Lionel Messi was ensured a place in the Barcelona first team for the next 20 years, because he is great now. Lets use that logic. After all the big clubs will claim everyone wants to see the big sides, with the big players. So under that logic Messi should be guaranteed a place in the Barcelona first team for the next 20 years, even when he is 50, and not good enough to be in the team. If the big sides are so sure that they are the only reason people watch the European Champions League, then put your logic all the way, never change your team line up for the next 20 years. Even when you lose 15-0 to Hibernian reserves, you should still play the same line up, because 20 years ago it was a good line up. Oh but that’s different they will say, surely we should be allowed to change our team because otherwise it would be unfair to have the same players in the team regardless of who is the best player. Well surely it is unfair to have the same teams in the champions league in the future, on the basis they were good sides. How on Earth can a 20 year guarantee be acceptable, when there are only 16 places available? If you are good enough, then proove it through qualifying. What have you got to fear? Then they will claim that they should be guaranteed financial security. Well it is not the job of European football, to ensure some clubs have an unfair advantage over the other clubs, for 20 years. It is totally corrupt, a monoploy and cartel. Plus it is even unfair on the big sides in the big nations too. 10 years ago, Manchester City, and PSG, would not have been in this elite 16, yet under such guaranteed places, they would not be able to qualify, while an older weaker power would be, simply because they were strong clubs for longer. 100 years ago Motherwell were better than Real Madrid. So does that mean Real Madrid should be stopped from playing in the Champions league and replaced by Motherwell. It is utter nonsense. Plus this idea of saying domestic leagues remain the same, but the champions league is replaced, by a trophy is even more unfair on smaller nations. All this is about the big nations being guaranteed, an elite place in the later stages of European trophies, while almost impossible chances for winning the top European trophies is available to smaller nation club sides. All the criticisms of this super league will be from the perspective of clubs in the big leagues. It is utter nonsense. In my view there is nothing wrong with saying there should be elite clubs in European football. It is glamorous, and exotic to have elite clubs, but they should prove that from year to year, with what is on the pitch. After all if they really feel big players should be kept in the league even when they are not good enough, then put your logic where your logic is, and only pick the same blooming team for the next 20 years. But the real issue is, should be it should be open for clubs from any nation to achieve that place? Otherwise football will end up like smaller sports, that ensure only an elite few of nations can qualify for the later stages of international club or international trophies. If there is going to be a European Super League. A far fairer system, would be an open league system, with promotion and relegation, and instead of domestic leagues. The top division would be a 16 team European Premier, that all teams from any country, in Europe, can work their way up to, be it Spain, or Slovakia. Then below that 3 tiers of west, and east divisions of 16 teams. So that in each tier, there are 2 divisions of west and east. And, a east and west tier 3. Then below that a west and east, tier 4 set up. This would be 64 sides. I think there is easily 64 sides sides in Europe, big enough to play in European Super Leagues, especially with the lower 3 tiers being regionalised to east and west. There would be a pyramid system below the European Super League with relegation for the bottom two teams back to their national leagues. And a qualification tournament of national champions to qualify for the tier 4 of the European Super League tier 4. Plus teams from the European Super Leagues would still compete in the national cup trophies, to give support to their national associations. Plus there could be European knockout cups, on top of this, with a lower division, and top division knockout cup. This would ensure that teams from any part of Europe could join the elites, it would be open to teams proving that they are in the elites. It is not the job of Uefa to ensure only clubs from big nations can succeed. It is not the job of European football to entrench an elite set of clubs, with little chance of other clubs joining the elite. It is a joke to claim that should be the case. After all Scotland, England, Wales and Ireland were the first 4 teams to play international football, does that mean the World Cup should just be those 4 teams playing each other, forever. It is an utter nonsense, to choose one point in time as the stagnant basis of who should always be Europe’s elite clubs. It is not the job of European football to give a monopoly to the present elite clubs, or nations. If you are good enough prove it every year, not a guaranteed place. Andy Murray used to be number one in the world, but now he is struggling, does that mean, that in 10 years time, he should be given a bye to the quarter final stages of the US Open, because he once won it? If the elite clubs from the big nations can be guaranteed places in the Super league. Then why do domestic leagues not guarantee them places in their top divisions. Have the Spanish league ensured that Real Madrid can never be relegated, even if they are bottom with 0 points? Have the English guaranteed that Man Utd, Chelsea, and Liverpool can never be relegated? So why should that be the case for European football trophies? It is pitiful that some clubs think they can ride rough shot over clubs from other nations, and entrench what is purely a time imposed cartel, totally against the framework of European promotion and relegation. The problem is the critics of this idea will only be based on what is right for the big leagues. The claim will be made that the European Champions League has been won by sides from only the big nations, for the last 20 years, but that is the whole problem with modern European club football, it is not something to entrench further, and claim that is good for everyone, when it is painterly not, OK for the smaller nations. Having only clubs from the big nations do well, will turn football into even more of a cartel, than it is now. Plus if you are so sure that only clubs from big nations are good enough then give us the same chance and prove it. I totally accept that there will be elite clubs, and elite leagues, but they should prove that every year, with promotion, and relegation, open to all teams. I love their being elite clubs that we will all watch, but that should be open to other sides to take the places of sides that have stagnated. And why on Earth would anyone have invested in Man City, or PSG, if they knew that there were only a handful of places open to new teams each year? Why would someone invest in clubs from smaller nations if they knew they could never reach the top? Even the Scottish League, does not have a rule that Celtic and Rangers cannot be relegated. Yes they get rewards for their huge support, and league positions, but even Scotland does not say they can never be relegated from the Premier. If this rule was in place 20 years ago, the elite teams would include Ajax, and Dyanmo Kiev, as not being able to be relegated for 20 years. Why? Finally let me reiterate. - EUROPEAN FOOTBALL IS NOT A CARTEL TO SET THE PRESENT ELITE CLUBS AS ELITE CLUBS, OR NATIONS, FOR ALL TIME. Some people will only be happy when there are only 16 clubs in the entire continent of Europe, and all the other clubs can shut down, because football outside the elite clubs is not worth bothering about, in their arrogant view.