European Football: How a Summer European Super League Might Work

The domestic season ends, trophies are handed out, and boredom ensues for a couple of months. Thus is the life of a football fan of a team in Europe's major leagues from May until August, with only the interminable torture of the transfer window to otherwise occupy their minds.

Of course, every other year there is a major tournament to look forward to; the FIFA World Cup and the UEFA European Championships provide a much-needed fix when they come along, but they sometimes lack the innate excitement or partisan interest generated by club-level football.

Every other summer though, there is simply nothing major to fill the summer months for most football supporters.

One idea has been floated, again and again, from time to time, with varying degrees of acceptance, excitement or scorn poured upon it from a great height: That of a European Super League.

For some, it is the ideal and natural progression for football on a regular basis, as domestic championships evolve to lack natural new competition. For others, it is the next generation of Champions League-football; something new to aspire to—perhaps a tournament not entirely controlled by the clutches of FIFA or UEFA.

But is it, realistically, a feasible option? And how would it work for the biggest clubs on the continent?

The Undying Belief of the Forthcoming Super League

It's far from a new idea.

That the best clubs in Europe might come together on a week-in, week-out basis has long been the dream of some.

Corporate sponsors pay vast sums to have their name splashed across a Champions League game once every two weeks in Belgrade or Madrid or Glasgow; how much would they shell out to have it shown twice a week, with huge audiences guaranteed to tune in to any of a dozen, or 20 of the best teams around, each time?

It's not just money which is the lure, of course, but the possibility of sporting excellence. Always, it is suggested that the very best of the very best come together to create this Super League: the top three from Spain, say, as well as the same from England, Italy and Germany for starters.

Except, since the ideas were first mentioned, those teams who were at the very top no longer remain there.

In terms of a Super League, they've missed the boat.

Perhaps that's the first test of qualification? Longevity, resilience to competition, the ability to regenerate quality. Stay at the top of your league for two decades, and you might get the chance to show what you can do against the best of all time.

Glenn Moore of the Independent wrote in December 2012 how Michel Platini would oppose any kind of move for clubs forming their own independent breakaway league. An expanded Champions League could be considered for additional revenue and competition.

The storyline goes back further of course; Paul Wilson of the Guardian explained in November 2011 how Real Madrid and Barcelona were in favour of more competition between the big clubs, rather than looking to improve their own domestic league, to provide more regular competitive action closer to home.

Matt Scott of The Guardian reported in July 2011 on how the biggest clubs were set to give FIFA and UEFA threats to break away from their control, unless concerns over fixtures and finances were addressed.

Keep going. Even back in 2008, Arsene Wenger was telling the Guardian's Martin Palmer about how a European Super League was inevitable.

And so it goes on.

Is it a threat? A veiled cover for the biggest sides to squeeze more money and big-level games out of those who run the game, rather than an actual desire to create a new Super League themselves? Or is it simply that the structure and the timing are not quite right for those who do not wish to entirely leave their Premier League, Bundesliga or Serie A setting?

European Super League: Creating a Prototype

The summer of 2012 saw the European Championships take place; 2014 sees the FIFA World Cup. Then the Euros are back in 2016, the World Cup in 2018—and so it goes on.

Whilst other tournaments do occur in the off years, such as the Confederations Cup of this very summer, there are neither enough teams competing in it or else the tournaments are not European-based—meaning clubs set to play in the Super League would not deem them necessarily prohibitive.

Any Super League then, would have to take place once every two years, in those summers between major international tournaments.

The World Cup runs for around six weeks, factoring in pre-tournament friendlies and training camps that nations undertake, so that is about the maximum time frame for the league to be able to run. With most domestic seasons finishing by the middle of May in tournament years, competing teams would likely take two weeks off, before beginning the European Super League season at the beginning of June, and running until mid-July.

That would leave perhaps another week's rest for players and staff, before starting up preseason for the new domestic campaign; a grueling schedule for players to contemplate, but not one that every club would be anticipating.

With just six weeks available to fit in as many games as possible, teams would realistically only be able to play each other once.

A 14-team league would seem the ideal size to utilise initially, with teams playing 13 matches during the Super League season; an unfair advantage perhaps to those who played seven at home and only six away, but monetary compensation might lighten the disgruntled responses. Or, even having the fixtures based on a "seeding" process, where the weaker sides played more home games in order to align the competition.

One game every three or four days, 13 fixtures, six weeks and one newly crowned European Super League Champion.

An undisputed best of the best.

Initial Problems, and Potential Solutions

Let's start with the most important of all: the fans.

Having spent serious money throughout the season on trips to Newcastle, London, Southampton and the like, would Manchester United supporters be willing or able to shell out every single week to fly and stay in Madrid, then Munich, then Milan? It would be hugely expensive for supporters to attempt to religiously follow their teams in action in such an intensive schedule.

A solution? What the European Super League would be primarily about, for clubs anyway, would be the financial aspect. They would want to rake in a guaranteed pot of many millions to compete in such a tournament when fans, players and other staff would usually be enjoying some well-earned time away from the game.

Even if it does get boring quickly.

Teams could ensure that, built into their fees for appearing in the ESL, was a reserve pot which could be put towards taking fans around Europe with them. Season ticket holders, say, who had been at every league game during the season; a prearranged number of 2,000 fans per team could be transported and accommodated for a relatively modest fee (in football terms), with only personal spending money the additional expense for the fans.

A maximum of seven away fixtures, with a rough cost of £300 for accommodation and flights per person, for 2,000 supporters, would equal a total expenditure of around £4.2 million.

Clubs can rake in significantly more than that on a single corporate deal nowadays; taking part in a prestigious competition such as the ESL could easily see that amount of money generated—with the specific aim of catering to fans.

What about the players?

This is more difficult. They cannot simply be expected to compete year in, year out at the same high level without suffering from burnout, injuries and disinterest. Players need rest time, and sponsors of the ESL will not want to find out that Ronaldo, Messi, Suarez et al. are having to miss half the tournament through fatigue.

The players also have to be convinced that it is far more than a mere summer post-season training operation; the ESL would be a serious competition with equal value to winning the Champions League.

While the solution could be simply to convince the players as such, there will be downsides elsewhere. Focus on the regular domestic season could be lessened, or players could be rested for the final month of the campaign, in preparation for entering the ESL at full fitness.

Finally, the clubs.

With only 14 teams being picked for the first ESL season, some big names are going to miss out. No more than two teams per nation could be entered, or else the dominant forces of the day would be in over huge long-term names, such as Ajax or Porto.

The other option is to go with the highest seeds in European football—but if breaking away from the control of UEFA is the aim, then using their coefficients to get started hardly seems like the best idea.

A Success Story, and Future Expansion

So the ESL takes off, with 14-strong and an eventual winner yielded after 13 matches; a maximum of 39 points to be won.

What comes next? With two years before the next one starts, how are new teams introduced? How are existing competitors told that they will no longer take part? According to UEFA.com Chelsea won €60 million in prize money when they won the Champions League in 2012, so there is reason to believe any ESL competitor would make at least that amount, even if they came last.

Why would they take part if there were no greater incentives on offer?

So if the 14th-placed side brought in €70 million, or €100 million for competing in the inaugural ESL, they wouldn't be likely to take expulsion or relegation too easily. An expansion for season two would be the only sensible option.

More teams in a league format means more games, but with no further dates on the calendar for use, teams would have to be split into two leagues. And thus, it becomes more like the Champions League—with group stages and a knockout phase.

Perhaps an additional six teams might be entered, with two groups of 10 playing nine matches each.

The top four in each go through, first vs. fourth and second vs. third from each group. Quarterfinals, semifinals and then a final in a neutral venue are fought out—a potential total this time of 12 matches, one less than in the first season, but with more teams taking part.

Progression? Or the start of a slippery slope whereby the European Super League begins to take hold of football on a continent-wide scale?

Onwards and Upwards

It won't be happening this year, or in 2015. But listen to those talking about it from within the game, and the expectation is that, sooner or later, a European Super League will happen.

And if it does, and Barcelona and Bayern Munich and Juventus are playing each other every week, how long until Valencia and Bayer Leverkusen and Roma want to follow suit and create their own European Championship League?

Possibly with slightly less income, slightly less prestige, slightly less interest.

Sound familiar?

The European Super League is, at this stage, more of an ideal than an idea. It is shadow rather than substance; something to be thought of and admired from a distance, but not actually acted upon or outright proposed. To do so would be as folly as to propose an overseas additional game to an already-established domestic competition.

There are riches and rewards enough in the game at present for teams to strive towards being competitive in their home countries, while European football presents new challenges, and challengers, each season.

It might seem as though the same old teams are always near the top, but football has always run in cycles and it remains so now.

A European Super League during the summer?

It might work exceedingly well. But it might also break an awful lot more in the process.

Follow @karlmatchett