Champions League: Is the new format better? 🤔 | The Football Reporters | ESPN FC

[@GB-fk7eq]

New format is 💯 better

[@costa7908]

If u want to watch a team play 10 group games u can do but most fans are only interested in the knockout phase

[@GB-fk7eq]

@costa7908 there are literally 16 games with jeopardy on them for the final round of games... by the last match day in the old format it was all games that usually wouldn't matter

[@Kuddochan]

Besides the fact that it's adding more fixture congestion, yes absolutely. Much more exciting to follow throughout and less predictable than the old group stage format.

[@LauraGS564]

it is just two games more than the previous foormat.

[@Kuddochan]

@@LauraGS564 Potentially 4 for all the teams having to do playoffs as well, but yes

[@Yogoniogi]

@@Kuddochan gives a chance to more teams

[@mattpotter8725]

​@@YogoniogiIt shouldn't be any giving more chance though should it? Shouldn't it be about the quality of the teams? I get it wasn't great before and needed a shake up but everyone playing different teams once either home or away didn't work for me, I'd have preferred 4 groups of 8 or even 9 than what we have. And I expect all the big clubs to get through so whilst it may seem like some smaller clubs are doing amazingly well let's just see where they finish and who they play and how they do in the next round before making judgements.

[@mattpotter8725]

​@@LauraGS564It can be 4 and that's a lot in an already overcrowded season. It's no wonder between this and FIFA/UEFA introducing more competitive games that not players are getting injured.

[@FeSezi]

New format is 1000x better. All you need to do is look at the live league table during match week 7. The old format was stale with the home and away legs. Plus, the new format assures top seeds are on opposite sides of the bracket. Last year Madrid played Lepzig-City-Bayern 👿while Dortmund played Eindhoven-Atletico-PSG to reach the final 😂

[@Philosific]

@@FeSezi my friend literally game day 8 nullifies all of this. All of the top teams play lesser teams which gives them a greater chance at 3 points to qualify.

[@FeSezi]

@ with all due respect, please reread my post. The league table will dance throughout all the games. See City (tie/loss eliminated, win advance) PSG (lose and potential elimination, win advance) Madrid, Bayern, etc. And it’s likely all four of those teams will be in the playoff round so they’ll need to play 9 games to win the tournament

[@LauraGS564]

@@Philosific what? How does it nullify anything? Only Barcelona and Liverpool have successfully qualified so far, the fates of others teams are hanging by the thread. And no, all the top teams do not play the lesser teams, that was in the previous format, this format has all teams facing teams from each pot. Are you stupid?

[@aidanlynn]

It’s so much better, it gives smaller clubs a chance to progress.

[@magicaces13]

It also means the big clubs will qualify every season for the knockout stage with no issues. City had 11pts out of 24 to qualify.

[@campfirefootball]

So basically: We as journalists don't like this format because we think it's hard to write about. That's your challenge. Figure it out if you are any good at your job. Stop telling the public the old format was so much better because you can't handle change. This is just low IQ sports journalism/reporting.

[@SylvanPaul]

New format is so much better but agree it should just be top 16 teams

[@Filip-ko8wl]

What on earth are these guys talking about, I've enyoyed this format way more than the previous one, before it was usually clear wich teams were going trough by day 4, and suprise it was always the same big ones + why would you rather see 3 home and away games than 8 games against different teams, I got to see my country's club brugge play against juve, aston villa, milan, dortmund, sporting and celtic. And not only wil they probably qualify for the next round (wich is both unexpected and amazing to me), they might even kick out man city on the last day if they win or draw couldn't even dream of that with the boring old format

[@emilepelletier8176]

It should be straight up 1-16 qualified, with 17-36 eliminated. Then matchups decided by the seeding - 1vs16, 2v15, and so on until 8v9. But that's two less games so that won't happen.

[@LauraGS564]

that makes no sense since top 8 qualify directly and 9-24 play playoffs which will see 16 teams qualify. Why would the team in the 16th get to qualify automatically?

[@jaybinjohn8029]

​@LauraGS564 why should a team that finish 24th get another chance to qualify, finishing 24th is easy, should be top 16 and rest all out, that will force the big teams to take each group game seriously

[@emilepelletier8176]

@ my thoughts on this as well

[@mattpotter8725]

​@@jaybinjohn8029I agree with you wholeheartedly, but we all know the answer to this, it's in case a Real Madrid, Man City, Barca, or Bayern have a bad, or more difficult draw and struggle, so it gives them a second chance. If I'm playing devil's advocate I'd also say playing a fairly random set of teams, even if you have to pay a certain number of top, middle, and lower seeded teams, you can just be hard done by, so maybe a second chance might be valid. In the end though it's all about money and keeping the big teams in the competition, it's not about what's fair or not.

[@magicaces13]

exactly this. 16 teams and then the big clubs would scrap to get in and it would be exciting. Even some big clubs would lose out then.

[@ThusieMathevulaVlog]

This new format is terrible, most of the times have no idea what's going on

[@adrvar01]

Top 8 should have 2 home games against the 9-24 winners

[@nelsonajayi5277]

These guys are chatting rubbish. The new format has just 2 more games. The group stages last year had some completely lopsided groups teams had a guarantee of 12 points. And you have better match ups. What's wrong with managing a game for a draw and taking chances. Who also cares about the amount of work analysts do. Its more exciting to me.

[@magicaces13]

The whole league stage has been rather pointless. It should only be 16 teams getting through.

[@mattpotter8725]

I agree and I've just not been interested at all. Either what you suggest or have 4 groups of 8 or 9 with the top team bypassing the playoff knockout round with the next 4 going into it would be my suggestion, because trying to work out who needed what before the last few game weeks made it almost impossible to work out who was in jeopardy and who wasn't. In groups of 8 or 9 you know who everyone is playing, which to me is fairer, and apart from this only those that lose their first 2-3 games and get distanced would not be in with a chance so it's similar to this new format but not intuitive and easier to understand. What has been done seems to have been done to help the big clubs get through and just seems like big free for all. It's a mess.

[@magicaces13]

@mattpotter8725 agree. I've not been interested. A few good games here and there but as a fan it's been very hard to get into.

[@stewartsmith5816]

Have only 6 group games in Sep-Dec as just now, but have the last 32 in January and the last 16 in February. Just avoid those two group games in January.

[@mattpotter8725]

I see all the comments saying it's 100% better but because of not being able to work out who has the easier draw without being and to tell the difficulty at a glance, due to only playing certain teams once, home and away, I've just lost interest in the whole thing. It wasn't great before and needed a shake up but i don't think what has been done is that great either, just create 4 groups of 8, although this has only been done to keep more big teams in, discussing with that final comment about giving the bigger clubs potentially easier final matches, that says it all. My suggestion of 4 groups of 8 instead of the 8 groups of 4 previously though wouldn't wash because UEFA wanted to increase the number of clubs competing to get potentially more big clubs into the competition that may have finished just outside qualifying places in their national league in previous years. In previous seasons i anyways found a game i wanted to watch on the Tuesday or Wednesday so having potentially more choice of a bit game made no difference to me. In the end i expect all the big clubs to qualify and i may be wrong here but you could get two big clubs facing each other in the first knockout round before, I guess the difference here is that there's an extra knockout round? I don't know, I've just not been interested in this format at all, i don't think it's any better than your it was before. People have short memories so we'll only know after a few seasons but i think there are better ways of doing things.

[@osdahi]

more football reporters segments please!

[@dcap163able]

Its way better because each game is crucial and it actually counts not like before where its home and away sometimes those games were boring cause you already know whos going to win

[@magicaces13]

How was each game crucial for man city? They won 3 out of 8 games and are still in the knockout stages. It makes no sense.

[@Afterthoughtbtw]

Pleasantly surprised by the tone of this - it's been transparently clear that all the media pundits and newsreaders have been under strict instructions to talk about how wonderful it is. I've found it really boring and lacking in jeopardy - despite being a fan of the club that has strolled through it. Speaking of Liverpool - you talked about the teams in 23rd and 24th potentially being a Bayern Munich/PSG/Man City and they will have to face Liverpool or Barça. Then what is the point of trying to top the group if you could be 'rewarded' with a really tough draw for Liverpool and Barça against a team that has found their form after being abysmal for the first two thirds of the tournament (which should surely see you out of the running for the trophy)? It makes a mockery of the whole idea of seeding. (Which can never work in a format like this, anyway.) The whole thing is farcical.

[@emilepelletier8176]

I agree. Imo it should be 1-16 qualified and #1 seed playing #16, #2 playing #15 and so on... That would make the seeding really matter, as finish 1st like Liverpool gives you a really good path to the final. Maybe it's a bit elitist, but let's be honest the teams finishing below 17 just don't deserve to advance i think (like Man City). Plus you got pleasant surprises in the top 16, like Brest, Monaco and Feyenoord.

[@marcoluca9232]

Ogden, always a barrel of laughs 🥴 If he won 50 million on the lottery i swear he'd still have a face on him like his dog just got run over.

[@phiIip488]

Why do you care

[@magicaces13]

24 teams now in the knockout stages. Ridiculous. Too many games and too little drama. Man City just got through with 11pts out of the 24pts available. Less than half! All the big clubs will qualify for the knockouts every season. No jeopardy for any for any of these big clubs at all now. And there is still a draw for the next round instead of just 9 vs 24. UEFA always needlessly overcomplicate these things.

[@i2Them2]

Are these guys bought by the big teams? It's about excitement. Not about those big money boring teams competing in a superleague. Go underdogs!

[@saif19845]

the new format is worse bring back the group stages

[@jasonburrell4903]

It's not

[@costa7908]

@@jasonburrell4903it is it really is

[@nelsonajayi5277]

How? The new format is amazing

[@saif19845]

@@nelsonajayi5277How is it amazing when most of the games are pointless most teams will qualify in the old format there was upsets

[@izdatsumcp]

@@saif19845 that's why you need round of 24 and round of 16 to be 1 leg with home advantage for the higher seeded team

[@RyanMinnie]

Just not excited for Champions League this year, to many games that feel they aren't a must win to qualify. The old group stage made it feel more life and death from the start, this new format feels boring and drawn out.

[@Yogoniogi]

pls be serious. the old groups were so dead. there were just less games before feb w/ old format so you felt like it took less time to get to the knockouts

[@adamsamuel8593]

Should only be the tltop two (Champions and runners up, not top 4 or 5 teams to qualify for Champions league. Only top teams must be in the league not some average teams who might get an upset win, this ain't the Fa Cup, this is more special and global.

[@somerandomhomeboy]

Gaslighting! This looks like a hostage situation.

[@Philosific]

This format reminds me of the stupidity that is american sports. Same set up. You can come last in the table, do the bare minimum required to get to the playoff, the win the trophies. So the initial games are largely irrelevant. Say for a team like Madrid who is competing in so many competitions to win them all, it only makes sense for them to do the bare minimum required

[@russellward4624]

How are then initial games meaningless? If they had won those games they'd avoid the play in game and have a better seed. Every game was meaningless before. You knew every team that was going through before the 1st game except maybe 1 or 2. They were utterly pointless for City, Real, Lfc, Bayern etc...

[@Philosific]

@ look at the table and tell me what team is going through that you didnt expect to be going through? 9 and 24 have the same outcome. Did they put in the same effort? The only benefit liverpool and barcelona get is they play two less games with seeding into the round of 16. For the effort they haven’t gain much.

[@magicaces13]

American sports have much better setups to get through and at most half the teams reach the play offs. Where as here 24 out of 36 go through.

[@Philosific]

@ no the american sports format was the inspiration. And it accomplishes the exact same thing. Revenue. The average airtime for american sports games minus the MLS is 3hr. Play time is actually the same 90mins. Theres 82 basketball games in a season. Majority of those games are irrelevant. They literally have analyst that look at which of those games they can throw

[@Yogoniogi]

nah coming from a european you just outed yourself. bc this new system is so many things bc its give everyone a fair chance. if you can't understand how the old format was eaiser for the top teams then idk what to tell you bro.

[@BeRich-y8i]

Then​ other​ teams​ win​ more​ games​ than​ Man​ City.​ Shut​ ta​ .....

[@wmp3346]

I like it better

[@shaqwal676]

Good format

[@iwouldntlikemeeither]

Champions League is dead who wants to see garbage teams get smashed 5-0 every week if i want that i can just play FIFA 25

[@campfirefootball]

So when Barcelona beat Bayern 4-1, that was a waste of time? Real Madrid beating Dortmund 5-2. PSG 4 Man City 2. Have you even watched or are you just listening to these guys as gospel?

[@mat_j]

i like it

[@TheTalk23]

The new format sucks. However, it shows the if the big teams can step up. Liverpool can, city and psg have proven they can't

[@Gecmajster123456]

def does not suck

[@Yogoniogi]

explain how its worse. (without self reporting you just don't understand the new format)

[@glynhallett9895]

NO

[@LauraGS564]

It is so much better

[@puftdank3150]

The new format is terrible

[@Yogoniogi]

why?

[@chinitopogi7511]

Besides the fact that it's adding more fixture congestion, yes absolutely. Much more exciting to follow throughout and less predictable than the old group stage format.