retired_rachelst

I quite lked the second group stage. Every match in it was between top quality sides.

However, I prefer it this way. </BLOCKQUOTE>

Yeah didn't mean I preferred the first group stage to the second. More that I prefer it the way it is now, with a group stage followed by knockout. I feel it just dragged on a bit too much before.

retired_sedimohasel

It's not perfect I agree but I find it less annoying than having a crappy team score an ugly fast break goal and go through because they play 11 man in the box for 2*90min </BLOCKQUOTE>

It's called football. If the "good" team can't score for 180 minutes why do they deserve to go through? </BLOCKQUOTE>

I'm not saying they should based on 180 min but I'm saying that if you play 6 games the good team is more likely to go through and I like that better. If the team that plays 11 man in the box can do it consistently and win it shouldn't be a problem for them either to have to go through 2 group stages, should it?

retired_sedimohasel

And we only know the result because some crappy teams are in the CL. Could you predict accurately the results of the second group stage in the CL?

retired_jsnap

No, the problem is that about 90% of the group games are incredibly boring.

By doubling the number of group games you double the number of boring matches.

retired_jsnap

And we only know the result because some crappy teams are in the CL. Could you predict accurately the results of the second group stage in the CL? </BLOCKQUOTE>

No, we know the result because you want to handpick the best 8 teams and put them in the quarter final.

Then you want to pick the best 4 from those and put them in a semi etc.

retired_sedimohasel

Unless you change the teams in the groups

retired_sedimohasel

And we only know the result because some crappy teams are in the CL. Could you predict accurately the results of the second group stage in the CL? </BLOCKQUOTE>

No, we know the result because you want to handpick the best 8 teams and put them in the quarter final.

Then you want to pick the best 4 from those and put them in a semi etc. </BLOCKQUOTE>

I never said I wanted that. (or that was an ironic post like when I was saying we should pick the winner of each game out of a hat)

What I want is the best 32 teams in the CL and a competition that has enough games for a team to recover from 1 (or even 2) bad matches hence the 2 group stages. This would as a result have more chance of having the best 8 teams in the QT but they obviously won't all be there every year.

retired_firebear369

And we only know the result because some crappy teams are in the CL. Could you predict accurately the results of the second group stage in the CL? </BLOCKQUOTE>

No, we know the result because you want to handpick the best 8 teams and put them in the quarter final.

Then you want to pick the best 4 from those and put them in a semi etc. </BLOCKQUOTE>

I never said I wanted that. (or that was an ironic post like when I was saying we should pick the winner of each game out of a hat)

What I want is the best 32 teams in the CL and a competition that has enough games for a team to recover from 1 (or even 2) bad matches hence the 2 group stages. This would as a result have more chance of having the best 8 teams in the QT but they obviously won't all be there every year. </BLOCKQUOTE>

So if the best 32 teams included half of La Liga, Serie A, the Premiership while throwing in Lyon and Bayern for the hell of it, you would watch that?

retired_sedimohasel

Yes, just like you would still watch the EPL if half of the teams were in London
I don't care where the teams are from in the CL like I don't care where the teams are from in a League.
And I would still watch the WC if it had 25 European Nations in it too.

retired_jsnap

Why should they be allowed to recover from 1 or 2 bad games?

The whole reason the group stage is boring is because teams know this.