The Super League and why it Failed

in Sports Talk Social2 months ago

In my opinion, the Super League idea was not a good one and little wonder, it died fews days after its ideation. There are already too many football competitions both at the domestic levels and at the international level. Introducing another competition that would have involved same teams, which are already competing in these numerous tournaments would have been uncalled for.


Not to mention the fact that this proposed Super League appeared to be less competitive looking at the way it was being structured. Inasmuch as monetary profits would have been made by the founding team as well as participating team, it would have in some ways affected the performance of some players in more important, rewarding and competitive football competitions like their domestic leagues and international tournaments like the Champions League/ Europa League.

The new European Super League was initiated by Andrea Agnelli who happens to be the current president of Juventus. The competition was immediately written off and frown at by the football community as its sole essence was money, greed and it was structured to negatively impact the existing Champions League. More so, it was said that the new European Super League would generate more money than the existing Champions League and would result in a greater distribution of revenue throughout the game.

The League Structure
Below is how the new Super League was being structured. Firstly, the league would have included 20 football teams. Inside these 20 football teams would have included 12 teams referred to as "founding members", three unnamed clubs they expect to join soon, and five sides who qualify annually according to their domestic achievements. The 12 founding teams were Juventus, Ac Milan, Inter Milan, Barcelona, Atletico Madrid, Real Madrid, Liverpool, Manchester United, Manchester City, Arsenal, Tottenham Hotspur, Chelsea. These were the teams that agreed to join the competition and fans of these teams showed their disapproval via protests and tweets.

According to the news, the new European Super League was scheduled to begin in August every year inclusive of midweek fixtures. You can only imagine the stress involved remembering that each of these players/ teams will be playing in their local leagues. On the whole, it would have had the same structure as the Champions League.

Such competition was being condemned by UEFA and other football governing bodies because it was uncalled for as well as sabotaging the existing competitions. UEFA went as far as threatening to ban any of its team that would participate in the Super League. This saw many of the founding teams of the new Super League exit such competition. All hope of the competition being alive was lost when the six English Premier League sides decided to not be members again.

Conclusively, I'm glad the proposed super league didn't work out because it would have hindered the smooth-running of existing competitions. It would have also brought about some disagreements in the entire football community and that would not have been good to the sports entirely. Instead of introducing ideas that would bring about division in the sports, ideas that would foster development of the game should be nurtured and adopted.


Yes, I love this

The new European Super League was initiated by Andrea Agnelli

I think it was initiated by Florentino Perez, the president of Real Madrid, that's why he is also the president of the Superleague.

On the whole, it would have had the same structure as the Champions League.

What do you mean with structure? The tournament would have been very different.

The Superleague isn't officially dead, but it is clearly there would have to be some changes and negotiations for it to take place. The Superleague fixes these problems that are affecting the sustainability of football:

  • Younger audiences aren't interested in football. If football goes through a generational decline in interest, the economies of all football-associated entities, including the clubs of course, would be negatively affected. The entertainment industry is always evolving and adapting itself to new technologies, if football doesn't do this, it will lose relevance. The Superleague fixes this because it would provide world-class matches every week. Right now, most league matches are super boring and no one watches them. Ask yourself this, how many football matches do you see that don't include members of the proposed Superleague? The number will probably be very low.

  • State clubs are outcompeting normal clubs. UEFA is corrupted and they don't impose the "financial fair play" rules. Qatar obtained the world cup of 2022 through corruption, and both Qatar (PSG) and Emirates (Manchester City) are using football to infiltrate their interests and agendas in Western society. They don't care about football, they care about contacts and political favors. It is no coincidence that the only state clubs are in France and UK, 2 of the most important countries in Europe. I wouldn't be surprised to see another state club popping out in Germany. Spain and Portugal are politically irrelevant so there is no state clubs in those countries even though both of them have a very active football culture. The Superleague would allow normal clubs to economically compete with state clubs. Without the Superleague, Manchester City will easily dominate British football for years to come, and both City and PSG will dominate European football as a whole. Forget about Bayern Munich, Real Madrid, Barcelona, Juve, Milan, Inter, United, Liverpool, they cannot compete with state clubs in the long run.

There are more reasons to be in favor of the Superleague but I believe those 2 are enough.

Congrats on making the sports curation showcase 👏 🙌