The European Super League is a replacement for the UEFA Champions League. The founder members will always qualify, while 5 teams can earn their way in each season as wildcards.
It differs to the Champions League because there won't be pointless contests between the likes of Barcelona and terrible placeholder teams like Celtic that would never win in 100 attempts.
Everyone is jumping in to say that it's corrupt and money whoring, but it won't actually affect that much in the footballing world. Those teams will still compete domestically, their players will still play for their national teams...nobody will notice the difference.
The whole European Super League controversy strikes me as manufactured to produce an outcome favorable to progressive entities, giving them the perfect excuse to mandate more money for women's football under the guise of a review into their business practices. The UK government has threatened to take major actions against the clubs involved in this. Government controlled sports teams were a thing in the former USSR, we might see them return if "the fans" don't stop going full retard.
Even the whiners technically win, because there will be a women's super league, which will probably be like the WNBA, a parasitic organization that exists purely so women don't burn the whole thing down with MeToo accusations.
Those teams will still compete domestically, their players will still play for their national teams...nobody will notice the difference.
You're leaving out that the new larger Super League would become the priority tournament year round. This would make the Premier League (the most popular, lucrative domestic soccer league in the world) into an afterthought, similar to the currently stagnant Carabao Cup. Teams in the Super League could afford massive squads, with the best players being reserved for the Super League, and the formerly number one Premier League being used to play fringe players.
Because of the fact that - unlike in the entire European football pyramid - the fifteen founder teams would not require any qualification via domestic league status, there will be no incentive whatsoever to risk major players in the Premier League, or to make serious efforts to win it.
It's a closed shop. Forever. No Leicester City miracles ever again.
Your example of Celtic vs Barca is terrible. They've played each other 10 times in the Champions League and Celtic have won once. So much for your "never in 100 attempts" hyperbole.
It is a massive change in that these clubs will govern the competition themselves without interference from the governing body UEFA. There will no longer be qualification on merit with the 15 founder members given a permanent places in the tournament. Many domestic leagues are threatening the breakaway teams with expulsion and UEFA President Alex Ceferin said that super league players will be banned from playing in the World Cup and European Championship, although I'm somewhat skeptical as to whether they have the balls to follow through on this.
I do agree with you that it's ridiculous that governments would seek to interfere in private companies setting up a sports league. The game is already ruined anyway. Egregious CL seeding makes the knock out stage a de facto closed shop already, but to claim that "nobody will notice the difference" is quite a stretch.
The massive change is that there isn't a progressive joke of an organization raking money in. Teams can still qualify on merit, which was in the founder documents that clearly none of the opponents read.
Government power wins again. God only knows what was threatened to make this idea fold so quickly.
5 teams of 20 qualify on merit. 75% have their place forever.
Do you really believe that the teams involved in setting this up don't already and won't continue to indulge in the same progressive virtue signalling that UEFA do? If so, I've got a bridge to sell you.
What is the whole "Euro Super League" shit, and why is it good/bad?
The European Super League is a replacement for the UEFA Champions League. The founder members will always qualify, while 5 teams can earn their way in each season as wildcards.
It differs to the Champions League because there won't be pointless contests between the likes of Barcelona and terrible placeholder teams like Celtic that would never win in 100 attempts.
Everyone is jumping in to say that it's corrupt and money whoring, but it won't actually affect that much in the footballing world. Those teams will still compete domestically, their players will still play for their national teams...nobody will notice the difference.
The whole European Super League controversy strikes me as manufactured to produce an outcome favorable to progressive entities, giving them the perfect excuse to mandate more money for women's football under the guise of a review into their business practices. The UK government has threatened to take major actions against the clubs involved in this. Government controlled sports teams were a thing in the former USSR, we might see them return if "the fans" don't stop going full retard.
Even the whiners technically win, because there will be a women's super league, which will probably be like the WNBA, a parasitic organization that exists purely so women don't burn the whole thing down with MeToo accusations.
The official website only contains this one statement.
Which would be more credible if the ones I saw complaining weren't FIFA and the IOC, both of which are themselves corrupt money whores.
Anyone remember Blatter?
You're leaving out that the new larger Super League would become the priority tournament year round. This would make the Premier League (the most popular, lucrative domestic soccer league in the world) into an afterthought, similar to the currently stagnant Carabao Cup. Teams in the Super League could afford massive squads, with the best players being reserved for the Super League, and the formerly number one Premier League being used to play fringe players.
Because of the fact that - unlike in the entire European football pyramid - the fifteen founder teams would not require any qualification via domestic league status, there will be no incentive whatsoever to risk major players in the Premier League, or to make serious efforts to win it.
It's a closed shop. Forever. No Leicester City miracles ever again.
So another way to punish the UK for Brexit by stealing all that Premiere League money...
What you are claiming is laughably inaccurate.
Your example of Celtic vs Barca is terrible. They've played each other 10 times in the Champions League and Celtic have won once. So much for your "never in 100 attempts" hyperbole.
It is a massive change in that these clubs will govern the competition themselves without interference from the governing body UEFA. There will no longer be qualification on merit with the 15 founder members given a permanent places in the tournament. Many domestic leagues are threatening the breakaway teams with expulsion and UEFA President Alex Ceferin said that super league players will be banned from playing in the World Cup and European Championship, although I'm somewhat skeptical as to whether they have the balls to follow through on this.
I do agree with you that it's ridiculous that governments would seek to interfere in private companies setting up a sports league. The game is already ruined anyway. Egregious CL seeding makes the knock out stage a de facto closed shop already, but to claim that "nobody will notice the difference" is quite a stretch.
1 in 10 is still a poor record.
The massive change is that there isn't a progressive joke of an organization raking money in. Teams can still qualify on merit, which was in the founder documents that clearly none of the opponents read.
Government power wins again. God only knows what was threatened to make this idea fold so quickly.
5 teams of 20 qualify on merit. 75% have their place forever.
Do you really believe that the teams involved in setting this up don't already and won't continue to indulge in the same progressive virtue signalling that UEFA do? If so, I've got a bridge to sell you.