Only thing ‘Super’ about new league is the ca$h

AFTER decades of trying and throwing enough cash at the problem to fund a space programme, Americans still stink at football.

But nobody plays smash-and-grab better than we do.

So it’s hardly coincidence that plans for a 20-team European Super League, a discussion that went nowhere for years, were finally made public now that a growing number of US owners hold the reins to some of the most legendary clubs over there.

Nevermind that the proposal would hollow out Europe’s domestic leagues, destroy fan loyalties generations in the making, or drive a stake through the heart of the game’s enduring myth – that any team can rise or fall based solely on merit.

The guys behind the Super League are betting only suckers still care about that stuff.

“By bringing together the best clubs and best players in the world,” the group said in a statement on Sunday, “the Super League will deliver excitement and drama never before seen in football”. Please.

This scheme is not about staging grand competitions – football already provides those in abundance – it’s a cash grab. It’s about cost-certainty, sharing anticipated sky-high TV revenue, and essentially being guaranteed to turn a profit.

It would adopt the “closed-league” model that governs and enriches all the major pro sports in North America, including Major League Soccer; that is, once you’re in the club, no matter how lousy your team might be in any given season or seasons, no need to sweat about getting dropped – the formal term is “relegated” – to a lower league. The spot is yours forever.

The pandemic devastated sports teams worldwide and resulted in losses – especially to the elite clubs – of hundreds of millions of dollars.

And to be sure, European football could benefit from some reform. But the proposed Super League is not about saving anything more than the fat-cat owners’ already outsized slice of a pie that was more than a century in the making.