or to join or start a new Discussion

66 Comments
Article Rating 1 Star

Old European Cup or Champions League.

Which out of the 2 is/was easier to win?

posted on 9/7/12

Comment Deleted by Site Moderator

posted on 9/7/12

i think the older one was easier to win, simply because of the fact the level of competition is now higher.

as said above, it was harder to get into, but once there easier.

nowadays because 3 or 4 teams from each country enter, simply beating barcelona may not be good enough, you then may have to contend with real etc.

posted on 9/7/12

World class teams like my beloved Nottingham Forest don't even bother entering these Mickey Mouse cups like the Champions League anymore.

Even the European Cup was pretty easy for us at one point, but I'd have to say the Champions League is the easiest to win. If they make it a little harder (like the Championship) then we might actually try in the future

posted on 9/7/12

The old one was more difficult to win...

Firstly all the teams were rightly champions.

You had to travel to teams in the back ar$e of nowhere and try escape intact...the transport and accomodation would have been horrendous, and probably would have taken several days to get to some of the destinations!..

Also squads were not as big, you basically had your best 11 players playing every game of the season.

Liverpool won the champions league in 2005... we finished 4th to qualify for it and 5th the season we won it!!!! CASE IN POINT...easier to win

posted on 9/7/12

I love it when this debate comes up.

You always get teams of the more 'recent' winners bigging up the C L but in todays era, getting to the quarter finals and even semi finals can be a somewhat easy route

and it's all thanks to a little thing called seeding.

So, two things:
you don't have to be a champion to enter it
you don't have to worry about an early exit

I also note that some of the younger fans always use the pitiful technique of highlighting the teams that were in it in the 60s, 70s and 80s and proclaiming them to be poor teams.

Do these people not realise that these teams were the elite football clubs?

The very best in England, the very best in France, the very best in Spain, Italy, Gemany - not runners up, not 3rd or 4th placed teams but the best

If the old format existed now, United could be drawn agaisnt Barcelona in first round - I don't think they'd like that would they ?

Don't be foolish to assume that teams that aren't considered great in the modern game weren't the best in previous years.

Who remembers Dynamo Kiev - people will look at them and say 'naah, they're garbage' but do some of these people remember the team they had 20 years ago ?

It's considered easy to get to the quarter finals of the CL in this era. Why you ask ? Well, just look at the reaction of the media when an english club goes out at the group phasee - it's recognised as shameful

The old format was a time when football ability alone was the deciding factor. Now, it's monopolised so the big clubs remain big and the small clubs don't break the mould.

It really is straight forward

.

posted on 9/7/12



Yes, i'm applauding myself there

posted on 9/7/12

The new format is just longer and has more team in it, which means there is more competition but its not necessarily harder.

The fact that it pretty much the same last 16 every year, with the odd surprise team is evidence that the group stages are pretty pointless. The way that teams are seeded and groups are made up, you pretty much know which two teams are going through in every group before a ball has even been kicked. It would be a much more interesting competition if they just had the top 2 teams from each country and it was a knock out competition. But then there's not as much money to be made that way.

posted on 9/7/12

posted on 9/7/12

It'll be much harder in five years time, when Platini decides that instead of wasting his time with the 'Europa League' then he could just expand the 'Champions League'. Trust me UEFA are considering this, it would make much more money.

posted on 9/7/12

i don't get the argument that the quality was terrible in the old format. people are forgetting that back then these teams were actually good and there were very few teams filled with superstars - mainly local lads and very few if any foreign players. madrid did so well due to the outrageous help they received from franco and his cohorts.

it might be harder to win for most teams these days but for the likes of madrid/barcelona/bayern/man united, they almost expect to reach the semi's at a minumum every year. the seeding system of the current format takes out most of the actual competition until the later rounds unless a team seriously messes up.

Sign in if you want to comment
RATE THIS ARTICLE
Rate Breakdown
5
0 Votes
4
0 Votes
3
0 Votes
2
0 Votes
1
0 Votes

Average Rating: 1 from 1 vote

ARTICLE STATS
Day
Article RankingNot Ranked
Article ViewsNot Available
Average Time(mins)Not Available
Total Time(mins)Not Available
Month
Article RankingNot Ranked
Article ViewsNot Available
Average Time(mins)Not Available
Total Time(mins)Not Available