Just having a debate at work about the fairness of the Champions league coefficients for individual teams. Wanted peoples thoughts.
I am in the camp that believes pot one teams should be the Champions of their respective comuntries (certainly the top domestic leagues). This would avoid 3/4 top teams in one group. I accept it may even itself out across the years after consistently doing well in your domestic leagues and thus qualifying for the Champions League, but look at our group last year.
Those at work are claiming that the Champions League coefficients are entirley fair as they reflect your pedigree in that tournament across a number of years, and it is based upon how you have faired in that across the last 5 years.
I entirely disagree- the Champions League is a tournament based upon how you did in your domestic league the year before. It shouldn't take into account how you may have done 2 years ago in the competition- it's called the Champions League as it reflects the performance in your domestic league.
Why is it fair that United could finish 7th this year, maybe scrape in through the qualifiers next year if they finish 4th (for example) and jump straight back into pot one JUST BECAUSE they have a decent history in the competition, despite underperforming in their domestic league- which is what the Champions League is based upon.
Similarly- a team may enjoy a takeover, like us, PSG or Monaco etc, and win the league in the first season. They will only go into pot 4 and the competition risks losing a good team (if they are paired against other top teams, eg: Bayern (pot 1) City (pot 2) just because team X doesn't have a pedigree in the tournament.
You could have a shocking season and qualify for champions league, which proves that it is to do with your domestic performance, and nothing to do with your recent history in the Champions League, as these are saying at work. I believe the pot distribution should therefore behave in the same way.
Thoughts- as I am sick of arguing with these here, and wanted other thoughts. Am I being stupid?
I am in the camp that believes pot one teams should be the Champions of their respective comuntries (certainly the top domestic leagues). This would avoid 3/4 top teams in one group. I accept it may even itself out across the years after consistently doing well in your domestic leagues and thus qualifying for the Champions League, but look at our group last year.
Those at work are claiming that the Champions League coefficients are entirley fair as they reflect your pedigree in that tournament across a number of years, and it is based upon how you have faired in that across the last 5 years.
I entirely disagree- the Champions League is a tournament based upon how you did in your domestic league the year before. It shouldn't take into account how you may have done 2 years ago in the competition- it's called the Champions League as it reflects the performance in your domestic league.
Why is it fair that United could finish 7th this year, maybe scrape in through the qualifiers next year if they finish 4th (for example) and jump straight back into pot one JUST BECAUSE they have a decent history in the competition, despite underperforming in their domestic league- which is what the Champions League is based upon.
Similarly- a team may enjoy a takeover, like us, PSG or Monaco etc, and win the league in the first season. They will only go into pot 4 and the competition risks losing a good team (if they are paired against other top teams, eg: Bayern (pot 1) City (pot 2) just because team X doesn't have a pedigree in the tournament.
You could have a shocking season and qualify for champions league, which proves that it is to do with your domestic performance, and nothing to do with your recent history in the Champions League, as these are saying at work. I believe the pot distribution should therefore behave in the same way.
Thoughts- as I am sick of arguing with these here, and wanted other thoughts. Am I being stupid?