Three ways the Champions League format could be fixed

We are halfway through the second year of the new UEFA Champions League, and we have already witnessed the dramatic impact of the move in 2024 to a 36-team league phase on the Swiss model, unlike anything seen in Europe before.

To take one example, the final day of this year’s league stage saw Benfica goalkeeper Anatoliy Trubin deliver an iconic moment, scoring with a header in the 98th minute against Real Madrid to avoid elimination and push the Portuguese club into the round of 16. On the other hand, the format of the competition is now so confusing that Trubin himself was unaware how vital his goal was to Benfica’s Champions League hopes.

Clearly there is no perfect solution, but that doesn’t mean we can’t try! With the round of 16 taking place on Tuesday and Wednesday, we decided to ask our editors: how would you change the format of the Champions League, within the limits of what might be possible?

Here are three fascinating proposals from Mark Ogden, Gabriele Marcotti and Bill Connelly, ranging from the innovative to the subtly effective.

Two mini-leagues, a gigantic elimination round

UEFA has introduced several iterations of the Champions League since revamping the old European Cup format in the early 1990s. Despite the tweaks and changes, the competition remains the pinnacle of club football, and they have yet to break it.

But it is in the round of 16 that the magic happens. This is part of the problem UEFA must overcome, because no matter how many times the group stages are repeated, these early rounds will never carry the dangers and excitement of classic two-legged, winner-take-all encounters.

The only reason Matchday 8 of the league stage was so exciting was because it felt like a knockout, with Benfica’s 4-2 win over Real Madrid – thanks to goalkeeper Trubin’s stoppage-time goal – as good as any knockout match.

– Ogden: Real Madrid beat Mourinho. Now he could break them at UCL
– Analysis of the UCL round of 16, predictions
– Best Champions League stories, 2025-26: Bob Marley, Haaland in Viking, more

With all of this in mind, how do you change the format to add some dynamism to the group/league scene? We’ll never go back to back-to-back knockout stages from the first round – there’s too much risk and not enough guaranteed money for the top clubs to ever endorse that – so there has to be some form of group stage.

So why not split the championship stage in half and have two leagues feeding into the knockout stages, the same way the AFC and NFC feed into the NFL playoffs? Instead of a bloated league of 36 teams, create two sections of 18 teams, in which only the first two of each will be assured of a place in the round of 16. The remaining 24 – 12 in each section – would participate in a large elimination round – with an open draw!

play

Leboeuf: Benfica goalkeeper’s goal was a miracle in the Champions League

Jürgen Klinsmann and Frank Leboeuf react to Anatoliy Trubin’s last-minute goal that sends Benfica into the Champions League play-offs.

Let’s make sure only the top teams have an advantage, so if you finish outside the top two, you could face anyone in the playoffs. You might end up playing Real Madrid or Bodo/Glimt, but that would be a matter of luck of the draw rather than position-based rankings. And all teams would still play eight league stage matches, so there would be no reduction in match revenue.

This still wouldn’t be an ideal format. Too many teams would still be able to qualify with a mediocre league phase, and it could be argued that there would be just as many relatively meaningless matches, but I want Arsenal v PSG or Real Madrid v Bayern Munich in November to matter more than they do now. Having only two automatic spots available would increase the tension at the top, and what we all want to see is the big guns playing like they mean it. -Mark Ogden

Clubs choose their opponents

We’re being asked to be realistic here, so keep that in mind. We’re not going to go back to the one-league/one-team days, and we’re not going to go back to purely back-to-back knockout stages. (Plus, we effectively have a separate knockout tournament after the group stage anyway.)

I don’t think there’s a big problem with the current format, but the main problem is more with the rankings. Please note that this is not particularly significant!

Last year, Liverpool dominated the group stage, and their “reward” was a showdown with Paris Saint-Germain, who finished 15th (and eliminated the Reds). Then there was Real Madrid, who finished 11th and ended up playing Manchester City (22nd). Of course, both teams didn’t succeed, but it was a “punishment” for both. If Real Madrid had finished just one place lower, they would have faced – no disrespect intended – Celtic. Who would you rather play?

When we rank teams in the group stage by points (or, even worse, by goal difference), it’s not exactly a scientific assessment of their relative strength. So let’s give meaning to the rankings: let the clubs choose their opponents.

How would this work? Real Madrid finished ninth, making them the highest-ranked team in the Round of 16 qualifiers. Instead of being forced to play the 24th team (Benfica), they can choose any playoff team. Then, Internazionale 10th… they too can choose their poison.

Maybe Real Madrid don’t want to see José Mourinho again so soon after the fact. Maybe Inter, who face Bodo/Glimt, don’t want to travel north of the Arctic Circle to play on a plastic pitch in February. Whatever the reason, it would give a club a significant reward for finishing higher, as well as creating a televised event: imagine giving a representative from each team 60 seconds “on the clock” to choose their opponent. Plus, it would naturally ensure that the biggest and best teams are kept apart for as long as possible.

Then it would repeat in the round of 16: Arsenal gets first pick, followed by Bayern Munich, and so on. While we’re at it, let the higher-ranked team decide whether they want to play home or away first. We assume that playing at home second is an advantage, but perhaps some would prefer not to, whether due to match congestion, style of play or any other reason. Hell, let them decide if they want to play Tuesday or Wednesday too.

These “sports perks” are things you can earn on the field that actually mean something. This makes it less likely that at the end of the group stage clubs will mail it in or settle for a draw, once they know they are not in the top eight. — Gabriele Marcotti

Actually, the new format is… pretty good, but let’s make the seeding more concrete

Honestly, I think the biggest change we can make is in mindset. A giant eight-match league stage presents minimal risk, sure, but it has created some of the best stories this season. With eight matches, Benfica and Bodo/Glimt managed to overcome some early setbacks and find their way into the competition. Hell, Pafos and Union Saint-Gilloise almost did the same. They played better as they gained their footing, and that lack of danger actually benefited us as viewers. Treat the championship phase as a real season – although small – with time for twists and late surprises, this format is awfully fun, even though we know no one will be eliminated come October.

However, if we insist on making changes, I have some small ones.

First, for countries that field four or more competitors, I would allow at least one match against a domestic opponent in the championship phase. If we want to live in a world where the Premier League makes all the money and can afford most of the best players, then it benefits them even more not to have to compete against each other. It would certainly have been more difficult for Premier League teams to find themselves in five of the top eight places in the table if, for example, Chelsea had faced a trip to Arsenal, or if Manchester City had had to face their scarecrow team (Tottenham Hotspur). And hey, what if we end up with a random extra The Clasico Or The classic fell on the November list, who would complain?

Meanwhile, while many Americanized touches are offered, I would actually go even further in one specific area. Forget getting rid of the seedlings: I would sow everything hard!

There’s a potentially huge difference between, say, seventh-place Sporting CP (currently 16th in Opta’s power rankings) and eighth-place Manchester City (second) this year, or 17th-place Borussia Dortmund (19th) and 18th-place Olympiacos (45th). Last year, there was a huge difference between top-seeded Liverpool drawing PSG in 15th place instead of 16th-placed Benfica, or Celtic in 21st place instead of 22nd-placed Man City. There’s already a bit of randomness in how the final table looks – we don’t need one last blowout with the draw. Let the table rule everything: in the round of 16, the first-place teams play the winner of No. 16 and No. 17, No. 2 faces the winner of No. 15 and No. 18, et cetera.

These aren’t huge changes because, honestly, I don’t think there’s much to change. We play a mini-season long enough to have some serious plot twists and developments, we have a few crazy matchdays at the end of the league stage, and then we have a giant bracket that guides us through a few months of action. The expansion of the competition has been driven almost entirely by the endless quest for more money, but as tends to happen in this sport, the cowardly quest for money has given us football that is more fun to watch. -Bill Connelly