By Martin Skladany, Law Professor, Penn State University, Dickinson Law
The inequality between the gilded elite football clubs and all other teams is widening. One way to address this concern is to create more European football tournaments for the clubs most people live next to. Specifically, the Union of European Football Associations (“UEFA”) should establish two new tournaments—one for mid-table clubs and a second for clubs near the bottom of leagues across Europe.
The top eight European leagues could each have their two teams in the middle of the table compete against each other in a 16-team, single elimination tournament occurring at the end of the season. Broadcast and gate revenue could be divided by the participating teams and leagues. The same could be done for teams at the bottom of the table.
Why add more competitions? Doing so would provide additional revenue to clubs who might actually need it. The teams that qualify for either the Champions League, Europa League, or Europa Conference League split over 90% of more than $4 billion. Over time, adding new tournaments could slightly increase the chances of the non-elite teams more seriously competing for other hardware, making domestic leagues more exhilarating for everyone. The new tournaments would also bring extra excitement to fans who would be able to see many cross-country matchups for the first time.
Plus, fans whose only hope during the season is not getting relegated could now also cheer with pride as their club might compete for national bragging rights. This is because the two new tournaments would give a clearer picture as to which domestic league is the best across Europe.
Football afficionados claim that certain leagues are superior to others, yet they don’t have enough data. They often rely on a comparison of the talent playing for top-flight clubs from each of the major European football leagues. They do this because only league leaders compete in UEFA’s Champions and Europa tournaments. The new UEFA Europa Conference League (soon to be renamed the EUFA Conference League) is largely being held for the benefit of lower-ranked UEFA national associations, not mid- and bottom-table clubs.
So, let’s put something on the line—national pride in having the best overall league, not merely pride in a good club bankrolled by billionaires or historical pedigree. In the past 10 years, Spanish and English clubs have won 9 Champions League titles and 9 Europa trophies. If French, German, or Italian clubs consistently won the mid- and bottom-table tournaments, it would suggest that only the top teams in England and Spain are dominant, not their entire leagues. Alternatively, if English clubs ran away with the two new competitions, it could firmly establish the Premier League as the best.
Creating new ways for leagues to compete, would build league unity among fans, not just club loyalty. This would help cement the death of any future attempt at another Super League, where the top few elite clubs from each major European country would form a league among themselves. Such a proposed league would effectively destroy national leagues, while mid- and bottom-table tournaments across Europe would strengthen national leagues. It could be love of club, country, and league.
The new tournaments would accomplish all of the above without overtaxing players on elite teams who need a physical break. More games played by the sport’s superstars might rob football supporters of some of the players’ brilliance. Packed schedules encourage extreme athletic conditioning, which reduces the time that stars may spend resting or working on the art of the game.
The structure of the new tournaments should be designed to give players from smaller clubs a chance to shine on a new stage without burdening the team. A single elimination format would be perfect: even the winner of a 16-team event would only play four extra matches. Plus, the tournaments could occur after the regular season to allow league tables to be settled and to avoid competing with previously scheduled matches. Given that TV revenues would not approach anything comparable to the Champions League’s bounty, after-season timing and rapid elimination format would not require non-elite teams to add personnel.
While many designs could work, an initial attempt at the mid-league tournament could include the top leagues from the 8 highest ranked country associations, as designated by EUFA’s association coefficient. Some of these top eight country leagues have 20 teams (England, Spain, Italy, and France), others have 18 (Germany, Portugal, and The Netherlands), and one has 16 teams (the Belgian Pro League). The composition of the top eight national associations will change over time, which could easily be accounted for, as could any overlap of clubs qualifying for more than one EUFA tournament. If the Austrian Bundesliga with only twelve clubs, for example, rose into the top eight leagues, it would qualify their 6th and 7th teams into the mid-league tournament, to compete against La Liga’s 10th and 11th ranked clubs. Would this be a mismatch in the Austrian teams’ favor? Let the debate begin. Part of being a football fan is getting to dispute how Spain’s larger population should factor into this consideration, along with the fact that Spanish teams generate more revenue.
How might the new mid-league tournament ensure the 8th or 9th place team (in a league of 20) would not purposefully tank, so as to qualify for the competition? First, let’s not assume that professional athletes would do this—they get paid plenty and likely value honor and their legacy. Plus, it would be a public relations disaster if team management were seen to be attempting such a maneuver. Additionally, the new mid-league tournament could share some of the tournament’s proceeds with clubs that are just high enough in the leagues to not qualify. Teams any higher in the table would be incentivized to press on given they’d be in contention for Champions League and Europa spots.
The tournament of clubs toward the bottom of league tables could take two forms. The first scenario would entail selecting the two clubs in each league just above those who fall into relegation or relegation playoff spots. So, in England, it would be the teams finishing 16th and 17th in the table. In Portugal, it would be the teams ending up in 14th and 15th place. These clubs could also receive some of the tournament’s revenue to ensure fair play, yet the danger of getting so close to relegation would also reduce the likelihood any club would consider not giving it their all on the pitch. This is because teams lose substantial revenue when they are forced into lower division leagues. Alternatively, the tournament could be for relegated clubs and those thrust into relegation playoffs. This second approach would help buffer the financial blow of relegation.
The new tournaments could be tweaked in numerous ways, including expanding both competitions to include all UEFA national associations. The same should be done for women’s leagues. The tournament bracket could be set randomly or by ranking seeds.
In many other contexts, a competition amongst the non-elite might seem cruel. But tournaments of highly compensated professionals from mid- and bottom-table football clubs would reveal more about the sport than the usual elite cups.
Leave a Reply
You must be logged in to post a comment.