UEFA Champions League Revamp

Roma have no excuse. Absolutely none.

We've done great things off the pitch, but not a damn thing on it.

I can respect if we had pushed Porto all the way and they knicked both legs. But this wasn't a normal loss. We had a potent attack and a great midfield. Yes our defense was garbage and our keeper questionable, but still shouldn't have been enough to keep us from being competitive in this game.....and yet somehow we ended up imploding anyway. A penalty and 3 red cards is not the way to getting any CL spots back. Roma don't deserve it and neither do anyone else not named Juve.

It looks like if you are talking about the Lecce :lol
It is not even  a comparabile situation with now .

You are Juve , you could always take advantage of an incredible economic power  ( Have you idea what are the Agnelli for Italy ? ) .

Taking advantage,  exactly.

You talk about the Marotta ability , the man that converts the bread in win. .... But you forget yo have spent 50 + mln for years on Diego Felipe Melo etc

Because you COULD do it.

Inter and Roma , for example , CAN'T DO IT.

Because they are caged from FFP.

A jail that you never had , and it permitted to improve the team ..If you spent 100 for Melo Diego etc you hadn't Uefa to ban you.

Inter and Roma can't.

Inter can't buy Joao Mario because UEFA doesn't permitt to Inter to spend that money.

Roma MUST sell Pjanic ( to its contender league :lol ) within June because of FFP. Do you get it now ?

So PLS,  avoid these speeches when you didn't have bonds to improvement that your contenders are obliged to keep.

THhe FFP consolidates the gaps in the leagues and infact it can be just appreciated from those 3-4  teams destined to win forever so.  Not surprised Serie A becomes the Ligue One then anyway

FFP was a lottery. It froze the normally rise and fall nature of big clubs to a particular situation in time making the clubs on an upswing almost permanently in the position they were at that particular time.

Some clubs used guile to break the big freeze, e.g. PSG getting 200 million euro a year as sponsorship from the Qatar government (National Tourist Authority). Later cut by Uefa to 100 million a year that could be used as valid income for FFP calculation purposes, though they still get 200 million euro in cash yearly from the authority.

The Milan teams should be able to do the same with the Chinese owners but it will be more difficult to get it by Uefa.

The 200 mil sponsorship is 100% accepted by UEFA now for PSG. Reason they've slowed down transfers is that they're losing their shirt with Bein Sport TV in France (affiliated entity)... it's estimated that the TV network is in line to lose a cumulative total of 2,2 billion euros from now until 2020. That needs to get under control first before PSG splashes huge again.

I read that UEFA had reduced it for calculation purposes by half to 100 million.  Still a tidy sum of "free" money.

"PSG's sponsorship contract is thought to be worth 200 million euros a year, but both Le Parisien and RMC report that -- in an investigation into compliance with financial fair play (FFP) rules -- UEFA will value it at only half that sum."

http://www.espnfc.us/uefa-champions-league/story/1802680/reports-uefa-halves-value-of-paris-saint-germain-sponsorship-deal-with-qatar-tourism-authority

That was for fiscal year 2013 that was submitted in 2014.  Every year, clubs submit their financial results to UEFA who then validates them or adjusts them.  After that year, PSG submitted financials with 200 million and UEFA did not adjust them to 100 again.  Their books were accepted "as is".  The reason was that PSG, City, etc. threatened to sue UEFA with the EU over FFP as a whole.  A deal was struck that these clubs would accept the sanctions for 1 year but would then be free...  in exchange for them not pursuing the lawsuit.  That lawsuit could have led to the crippling of UEFA because, legally, FFP is illegal according free trade laws in effect in Europe.  

So when you see that PSG has almost 500 mil euros in revenue now according to Forbes (http://www.forbes.com/teams/paris-saint-germain/), that 200 mil is included.

Ligue 1 is very very strict about annual budgets. BUT, unlike UEFA and this dumb FFP, they ask for equity guarantees by the owners (such as a bank letter of credit) to cover any budget deficiency for the upcoming season. If the club doesn't cover the funds, they turn towards the bank letter of credit to cover the issue. They could care less about profits and expenses as long as the required funds to cover the annual budget are guaranteed. UEFA should learn from this.

It's therefore a clear circumvention of the intent of FFP. However, I suspect that if a club in Italy like Inter received 200 million a year sponsorship from Suning, for example, UEFA would disallow it as income for FFP purposes and would consider it a contribution from the ownership.

Robespierre wrote:It looks like if you are talking about the Lecce :lol
It is not even  a comparabile situation with now .

You are Juve , you could always take advantage of an incredible economic power  ( Have you idea what are the Agnelli for Italy ? ) .

Taking advantage,  exactly.

You talk about the Marotta ability , the man that converts the bread in win. .... But you forget yo have spent 50 + mln for years on Diego Felipe Melo etc

Because you COULD do it.

Inter and Roma , for example , CAN'T DO IT.

Because they are caged from FFP.

A jail that you never had , and it permitted to improve the team ..If you spent 100 for Melo Diego etc you hadn't Uefa to ban you.

Inter and Roma can't.

Inter can't buy Joao Mario because UEFA doesn't permitt to Inter to spend that money.

Roma MUST sell Pjanic ( to its contender league :lol ) within June because of FFP. Do you get it now ?

So PLS,  avoid these speeches when you didn't have bonds to improvement that your contenders are obliged to keep.

THhe FFP consolidates the gaps in the leagues and infact it can be just appreciated from those 3-4  teams destined to win forever so.  Not surprised Serie A becomes the Ligue One then anyway

Haha, Diego and Melo were flops!!  So was Amauri.  The reason we became successful again was not because of those purchases but because of these:

Pirlo - FREE
Barzagli - FREE
Pogba - FREE
Evra - FREE
Khedira - FREE
Tevev - $10M
Vidal - $10M

Not to mention hiring CONTE to coach these players.  He was in Serie B and then got fired by Atalanta but we took a risk on him and it paid off.

You're telling me we needed to abide by FFP rules to purchase players for FREE??  LOL!!

The reason Juve is at the top is because of Marotta and his transfer policies, buying star players for free and then selling them for $100M.  And hiring the best Italian coaches, Conte and Allegri.  Nothing to do with FFP or anything else.

Inter, Milan, Napoli, Roma, none of these teams have a clue how to find a Pogba or a Barzagli or a Tevez or a Vidal for cheap.  Milan spends $20M for Bertolacci.  Roma spends $25M for Iturbe.  And what about Inter?  That Jovetic purchase sure looks good right?  They had money to spend didn't they?  They just spent it on the wrong players because of mismanagement.  Not to mention some of the donkey coaches they hired over the years. Milan spent $80M last summer alone and finished in 7th place. They actually spent more money than Juve. How do you explain that??

The FACTS are Juve have had tremendous success in the transfer market by buying world class players for cheap and getting some even for free.  Plus hiring great coaches.  That's why we are back on top.  Plus having the balls to build our own stadium.  Has nothing to do with FFP or the power of Agnelli or anything else...

I hate using excuses but there is reason for italian clubs failing miserably to qualify and and do well in the CL= money.
FFP plus the coefficient system(in which italy lost its 4th place due to underperforming in the EL not underperforming in the CL) contributes to less money for the italian teams. this then becomes a vicious cycle, as an example I'll use inter.
So we have an average team and you need to improve to reach 3rd place so you need to spend money but you can't spend that much money because of FFP... Even then no big players or good enough players would come to your team because you're a EL team at this point. Now lets say we do get 3rd, you still might not have a good enough team to go through qualifying(like lazio last year)
I think things wouldve been different had the FFP not been implemented, which it should not have been, and the coefficient system not been this flawed...
But this is all speculation and make believe but there are reasons as to why italian teams are in this situation rather than just "lol italian teams are shit lol"

Saying all that though, Roma really should have won having the advantage of the 1st leg result

You can become successful in small steps, too. Just look at Borussia M'gladbach - no sugar daddy and no 50+ mio Euro bought super stars, but a team that was put together by clever scouting and patiently giving kids a chance.

InteristAli wrote:I hate using excuses but there is reason for italian clubs failing miserably to qualify and and do well in the CL= money.
FFP plus the coefficient system(in which italy lost its 4th place due to underperforming in the EL not underperforming in the CL) contributes to less money for the italian teams. this then becomes a vicious cycle, as an example I'll use inter.
So we have an average team and you need to improve to reach 3rd place so you need to spend money but you can't spend that much money because of FFP... Even then no big players or good enough players would come to your team because you're a EL team at this point. Now lets say we do get 3rd, you still might not have a good enough team to go through qualifying(like lazio last year)
I think things wouldve been different had the FFP not been implemented, which it should not have been, and the coefficient system not been this flawed...
But this is all speculation and make believe but there are reasons as to why italian teams are in this situation rather than just "lol italian teams are shit lol"

Saying all that though, Roma really should have won having the advantage of the 1st leg result

I get what you're saying but lets also take a look at our incompetent management in the last few years. First they hire Mazzari who plays a different system so we had to spend 10s of millions on below average players so Mazzari can have his full backs, and then Mazzari fails but we still give him another contract and sign more below average players, not the players he asked for mind you. Mazzari fails again and we hire Mancini who is expensive and very demanding, and we spend a ton of money on players that never performed. And this year we fire Mancini 10 days before the season (when he wanted to live long before) and hire an amateur, and we're willing to spend millions on players like Mario and Gabigol while we play Ranocchia and D'Ambrisio in the back. Our management is shit man, all what FFP did was stop us from throwing shit at the wall and hoping it would stick.

FFP is a good thing. It should help ensure long-term healthiness for clubs. Wishing that there was no FFP is either one of two things: That a rich owner could spend "free cash" or that the club could take on a lot of debt to spend on players. Rich owners are short-to-medium-term things at best. Few people in the world will continue to spend hundreds of millions of their own money for decades and decades. It's also very unpredictable. Taking debt is the worst, though, that risks the whole future of the club. Just ask Glasgow Rangers. FFP is a good thing because: long-term financial health > short-to-medium-term free cash party.

As for the CL revamp ideas, if it becomes a closed league I'll stop watching and caring.

Inter and Milan cannot blame FFP for their situation. Its constricting, its a hurdle, its difficult to pass, but these clubs have NOT done everything in their power to create good and successful environments. Its bad management from top to bottom. Inter has had like 7 coaches since the trebble and Milan has bought so many average players and spent so much money that its only up to the management.

How did Napoli and Roma become more successful than the Milan teams. How did Napoli go from being in Serie C2 to runner up in Serie A in some ~7 years? How does Roma keeps finding excellent talents while Milan signs Sosa? Its management.

Juve were spending big money under Secco and buying pure crap and flops, finishing mid table. Then the entire management changed and here we are. De Laurentiis is a dick but he runs his club in a great manner. Replaced Cavani with Higuain, replaced Lavezzi with Insigne, has had an ambitious run of coaches, signed excellent midfielders and a good defense finally. If Milan can sign 9 CBs or so and not land one then its up to Galliani to answer, not FFP. Inter actually signs good players but the squad is poorly planned, there is never continuity with the managers so they end up with 11 talented misfits and more managers than seasons since Mourinho.

Everyone knew of Nainggolan at Cagliari yet Roma signed him, everyone knew of Allan at Udinese yet Napoli signed him, everyone knew of Zielinski, Jorginho, etc and there they are under Sarri. Roma has an endless stream of talent, Romagnoli, Paredes, Verde, Florenzi, Nainggolan, Pjanic, Manolas, Gerson, El Shaarway, Perotti, Salah, etc. They mostly can't keep their players, but they find them and sign them, while Nagatomo and Zapata start in San Siro.

Blaming just FFP is short sighted. If Sassuolo finishes above Milan and Inter misses CL, then its up to themselves.

Of course FFP is greatly to blame for the problems of Inter and AC Milan.  The management model of both clubs is the model later adopted by the big English clubs.  

This model was based on the ability to acquire the best players and the ability to have multiple world-class or near world-class player options for every position available to the manager.  

The scouting system, the personal relationships of the management and the circles that Inter and Milan decision makers were in were not the same as Napoli's or even Roma's.  

With the change caused by FFP the decades/century long culture of Inter's and Milan's management system and corporate model became completely incompatible with the new environment they were cast into.  This  environment is the environment that Juventus got a taste of during their drop to Serie B.  Juventus, in fact, changed their management structure drastically.  

It is extremely difficult to replace powerful people within an organization, even with an autocratic owner, much less an organization that has cross-ownership by semi-independent  financial organizations (Fininvest), the other Morattis etc. Secrets are known, favors have been exchanged etc.

It's naive not to consider these facts.

But this would mean that Inter and AC Milan are still to be blamed for their own shortcomings, and it is not really the fault of FFP - especially when in the same league there are much poorer clubs that thrive in the same environment.

Milan is an extremely badly managed team, simple as that, rincon hit the nail on the head

rwo power wrote:But this would mean that Inter and AC Milan are still to be blamed for their own shortcomings, and it is not really the fault of FFP - especially when in the same league there are much poorer clubs that thrive in the same environment.

Of course it's FFP.  When you change the environment using an artificial construct, i.e. FFP it negatively affects the organism that evolved to succeed in the environment that existed prior to the change.  FFP did not negatively affect the poorer clubs.  They have always had to restrict their spending, pre and post FFP.

How is signing an array of scrubs and hiring 10 managers a consequence of FFP? Its bad management. Whatever back and forth Inter did with Mancini is not related to FFP. Milan spending some 100 million last summer and failing to get EL is not a consequence of FFP. This is bad management.

An effect of FFP was Roma being forced to quickly sell Pjanic. And yet Roma are much more successful than the Milan clubs.

What was that nonsense about selling Saponara to Empoli for little money after Allegri left? Or strengthening Roma with El Shaarawy? Why did Milan have some 7 CBs on the books a while back and yet none were deemed good enough? What about signing Lapadula to end with like 4 CFs and no actual wingers? Why is Honda still anything more than a brand of cars in Milano? What is the point of having both Bertolacci and Poli? Why did they go for 3 rookie coaches (Seedorf, Inzaghi and Brocchi) when the team needed stability? Finally, why does the president dictate the team's tactics?

Bad management all the way through. The blame lies on the directors and presidents of the club.

Inter and Milan now have new owners, let's see if they can straighten the ship. If Udinese and Sassuolo can own their own stadiums and have sustainable models then so can the Milan teams.

rincon wrote:How is signing an array of scrubs and hiring 10 managers a consequence of FFP? Its bad management. Whatever back and forth Inter did with Mancini is not related to FFP. Milan spending some 100 million last summer and failing to get EL is not a consequence of FFP. This is bad management.

An effect of FFP was Roma being forced to quickly sell Pjanic. And yet Roma are much more successful than the Milan clubs.

What was that nonsense about selling Saponara to Empoli for little money after Allegri left? Or strengthening Roma with El Shaarawy? Why did Milan have some 7 CBs on the books a while back and yet none were deemed good enough? What about signing Lapadula to end with like 4 CFs and no actual wingers? Why is Honda still anything more than a brand of cars in Milano? What is the point of having both Bertolacci and Poli? Why did they go for 3 rookie coaches (Seedorf, Inzaghi and Brocchi) when the team needed stability? Finally, why does the president dictate the team's tactics?

Bad management all the way through. The blame lies on the directors and presidents of the club.

Tbh UEFA are caught between a rock and a hard place. They felt that the break away was serious enough to happen so this was the compromise. The new EPL tv deal accelerated the big European super powers wanting a change. Gab Marcotti did an interview with some UEFA official iirc and he said non of the English teams really forced anything, they just went along on the ride.

Real Madrid earned less money from winning the cl than the team that will get relegated this season or sone thing like that was highlighted to indicate the financial might of the epl.

The truth is that English teams don't prioritise Europe, even the big boys. The EPL is the bread and butter and now the epls money means that clubs don't really care about the cl bar pride and prestige.

I actually think a super leaguess will be formed once this deal runs out.

It looks as if the UEFA will decide today or tomorrow about the new modus. But according to  SSNHD, there is no talk about "tradition teams getting preference", but it is about the Top4 leagues getting 4 fixed group stage starters for the top 4 teams in the leagues and no play-offs for them anymore.

rwo power wrote:It looks as if the UEFA will decide today or tomorrow about the new modus. But according to  SSNHD, there is no talk about "tradition teams getting preference", but it is about the Top4 leagues getting 4 fixed group stage starters for the top 4 teams in the leagues and no play-offs for them anymore.

"Tradition teams getting preference" would destroy the competition. Honestly, I have faith in the people who are responsible of the competition's format and I believe their standards of thinking consciously and being self-responsible are high enough to avoid taking immature and selfish decisions.

@Jibers

It can be like you said. But what if...?

The fact that EPL's cash flow is out of this world, doesn't make the teams instantly better and it's proven that they are not more competitive in Europe, so it has to be about a decision between FA, UEFA and if needed, football associations from other countries. What decision? I don't know, but surely about bringing in an economical balance, the discrepancy is too high and it's not beneficial for the Uefa Competitions and for the English clubs. Something that will be reasonable enough for each side involved in this situation.

Or, are the FA and the English teams more satisfied with the big amount of money and the lack of success and competitiveness in other areas? This is unhealthy.

@Vlad Money rules all and is the reason for all these changes. English football don't do well because of structural, tactical and fundemental understanding of the game compared to their continental rivals. I'm talking about on all levels. From managers to players etc even Neville and Carragher are both limited to their understanding of the game but are hailed in England. Story for another day

English clubs not doing well does zilch for their bank accounts. Prestige usually correlates with financial success. All the other leagues envy the financial might of the epl. How can some mid table team in the EPL compete with Bayern and Juve? English football always prioritises itself over continental competition and the EPL is the be all and end all here. Winning the cl gives you prestige abroad but it is less respected in the UK. We live in a bubble. This has always been the case, especially with since the premier leagues inception.

The FA can't do anything. They can't tell clubs how to spend their money. The Europa league is seen as a distraction. What's the point in prioritising it when finishing higher in epl gives you more money? Players get astronomical wages now in the epl and the history of clubs means zilch if you get to take home a massive pay cheque, play in the most watched league in the world etc there was a poll on winning the EPL vs winning the cl and it was 72% in favour of Epl. Cl is seen as the cherry on top of the cake. In England Barcelona would have been seen to have the better season but Madrid are viewed to have had the better season because the view of leagues and European competitors are different. The whole craze around the epl makes it like a soap opera.

If Europe can't get a bigger financial package whose fault is that? Clearly broadcasters see EPL as a bigger brand than the cl and that is the big problem here. It's the EPL vs the rest. I imagine the next EPL tv deal will be even bigger. Madrid and barca revenue sharing with la liga means they take a hit, Milan clubs are struggling etc EPL trams are al healthy.

There's nothing that can be done tbh. Money rules all. We will get a European super league eventually, it is inevitable.

rincon wrote:How is signing an array of scrubs and hiring 10 managers a consequence of FFP? Its bad management. Whatever back and forth Inter did with Mancini is not related to FFP. Milan spending some 100 million last summer and failing to get EL is not a consequence of FFP. This is bad management.

An effect of FFP was Roma being forced to quickly sell Pjanic. And yet Roma are much more successful than the Milan clubs.

What was that nonsense about selling Saponara to Empoli for little money after Allegri left? Or strengthening Roma with El Shaarawy? Why did Milan have some 7 CBs on the books a while back and yet none were deemed good enough? What about signing Lapadula to end with like 4 CFs and no actual wingers? Why is Honda still anything more than a brand of cars in Milano? What is the point of having both Bertolacci and Poli? Why did they go for 3 rookie coaches (Seedorf, Inzaghi and Brocchi) when the team needed stability? Finally, why does the president dictate the team's tactics?

Bad management all the way through. The blame lies on the directors and presidents of the club.

In the environment before FFP, Milan did not need to scrimp on players and coaches. Milan's management team was optimized for the environment prior to FFP. Inter the same. Again, replacing the entire management team that for decades was optimized for maximizing performance through the use of substantial financial resources similar to the other wealthy clubs in Europe, is not easy. The only failure I see, is the owner's failure to realize that the existing management could not adapt to the new fiscal environment and did not replace it wholesale. Replacing it wholesale might have been impossible anyway. Who knows what Galliani knows about Berlusconi, for example?

I agree with you Jibers.