I agree that it's been a qualified success, but I think there are a few ways to improve it (if UEFA want to send some consultancy money my way).
Firstly, I don't see why the league phase couldn't have six games rather than eight. The Conference League has six games because they split the draw into six pots of six teams, rather than four pots of nine. I don't think that would work for the Champions League, but future draws could be split into three pots of twelve teams.
If that had been the case this season, the extra teams joining pot one would have been Bayer Leverkusen, Atletico Madrid and Atalanta. I really don't see that as diluting the quality very much.
There are a few advantages to this. One, you reduce the players' workload, at least relative to the new baseline. Two, you increase the proportion of 'big games' played by each team - instead of one in four being played against a 'pot one' team, it's now one in three.
It would also increase the jeopardy in the league phase. City wouldn't have been caught out (they were 22nd after six games) but PSG would. If the 'last day' had been matchday six, only Liverpool would have been secure in the top eight, while only four teams would have had nothing to play for. And it would obviously change the dynamic surrounding the earlier games.
I also just don't like the way they've done the draw for the knockouts. If you're going to do seeding, you should do it right. It doesn't make sense that Liverpool's likely reward for finishing first is to face PSG, who finished in 15th, while Lille or Aston Villa (who finished 7th and 8th) could end up with 24th-placed Club Brugge.
My solution would be to have the playoff round set in stone - 9th plays 24th, 10th versus 23rd, and so on - from the start. You would then have a few options. You could go for an old-fashioned open draw, with top eight sides guaranteed a home second leg. Or you could have a semi-open draw, with the 1st, 4th, 5th and 8th seeds on one 'side' and 2nd, 3rd, 6th and 7th on the other. Or you could redo the seedings after the playoffs, so that if the 24th-placed team knocks out the 9th-placed team, they become the 16th seed, instead of 'inheriting' the 9th seed. You could then keep this weird semi-open draw they've been doing, where 1st/2nd plays 15th/16th, 3rd/4th plays 13th/14th, etc.
Overall, though, I agree with your main argument. I was expecting to hate the new format but, while I still prefer the 'apples to apples' competitive logic of the old group stage, it's been much, much better than I thought. It will be interesting to see if that's the case in future years, or whether the possibility of City getting knocked out has heightened the interest around the lower end of the table. Then again, they weren't the only big teams to have a poor league phase - just look at Real Madrid!
P.S. The increase in workload is big, of course, but it's also not unprecedented. The maximum number of games a team can play in the competition proper under the new format is 17 - eight league phase games, a two-legged playoff, then seven knockouts, including the final. This is the same as under the old two group stage format (six group games, then another six group games, then five knockouts). It would be interesting to look back on how and why that was abolished and whether concerns over the number of games played a role - they actually decreased it by almost a quarter!
I agree that it's been a qualified success, but I think there are a few ways to improve it (if UEFA want to send some consultancy money my way).
Firstly, I don't see why the league phase couldn't have six games rather than eight. The Conference League has six games because they split the draw into six pots of six teams, rather than four pots of nine. I don't think that would work for the Champions League, but future draws could be split into three pots of twelve teams.
If that had been the case this season, the extra teams joining pot one would have been Bayer Leverkusen, Atletico Madrid and Atalanta. I really don't see that as diluting the quality very much.
There are a few advantages to this. One, you reduce the players' workload, at least relative to the new baseline. Two, you increase the proportion of 'big games' played by each team - instead of one in four being played against a 'pot one' team, it's now one in three.
It would also increase the jeopardy in the league phase. City wouldn't have been caught out (they were 22nd after six games) but PSG would. If the 'last day' had been matchday six, only Liverpool would have been secure in the top eight, while only four teams would have had nothing to play for. And it would obviously change the dynamic surrounding the earlier games.
I also just don't like the way they've done the draw for the knockouts. If you're going to do seeding, you should do it right. It doesn't make sense that Liverpool's likely reward for finishing first is to face PSG, who finished in 15th, while Lille or Aston Villa (who finished 7th and 8th) could end up with 24th-placed Club Brugge.
My solution would be to have the playoff round set in stone - 9th plays 24th, 10th versus 23rd, and so on - from the start. You would then have a few options. You could go for an old-fashioned open draw, with top eight sides guaranteed a home second leg. Or you could have a semi-open draw, with the 1st, 4th, 5th and 8th seeds on one 'side' and 2nd, 3rd, 6th and 7th on the other. Or you could redo the seedings after the playoffs, so that if the 24th-placed team knocks out the 9th-placed team, they become the 16th seed, instead of 'inheriting' the 9th seed. You could then keep this weird semi-open draw they've been doing, where 1st/2nd plays 15th/16th, 3rd/4th plays 13th/14th, etc.
Overall, though, I agree with your main argument. I was expecting to hate the new format but, while I still prefer the 'apples to apples' competitive logic of the old group stage, it's been much, much better than I thought. It will be interesting to see if that's the case in future years, or whether the possibility of City getting knocked out has heightened the interest around the lower end of the table. Then again, they weren't the only big teams to have a poor league phase - just look at Real Madrid!
P.S. The increase in workload is big, of course, but it's also not unprecedented. The maximum number of games a team can play in the competition proper under the new format is 17 - eight league phase games, a two-legged playoff, then seven knockouts, including the final. This is the same as under the old two group stage format (six group games, then another six group games, then five knockouts). It would be interesting to look back on how and why that was abolished and whether concerns over the number of games played a role - they actually decreased it by almost a quarter!