Five Champions, Five Journeys: What Winning the Conference League Actually Meant
By Cheval John | Vallano Media
This article was created with the assistance of artificial intelligence.
The final version was reviewed, edited and fact-checked by the author
Graphics created with AI-assisted design tools.
Visual concepts, editorial direction, composition, and final creative decisions were developed by Vallano Media.
Five completed seasons.
Five different champions.
Since the UEFA Conference League began in 2021–22, Roma, West Ham United, Olympiacos, Chelsea and Crystal Palace have each lifted the trophy once.
There has been no dynasty.
No club has returned year after year to dominate the competition.
Instead, its first five champions arrived with dramatically different histories, expectations and relationships with European football.
Roma had the responsibility of becoming the inaugural champion of a tournament with no history behind it.
West Ham began in qualifying and went through the entire campaign unbeaten.
Olympiacos arrived only after its Europa League path had closed.
Chelsea entered as the overwhelming favorite and had to turn expectation into execution.
Crystal Palace qualified on sporting merit for the Europa League after winning the FA Cup, only for an off-field multi-club ownership ruling to redirect the club into the Conference League.
Same trophy.
Five completely different journeys.
And the differences matter.
Editor’s Note: The Conference League format changed beginning with the 2024–25 season.
Roma, West Ham and Olympiacos competed under the previous group-stage system.
Under that format, clubs finishing third in their Europa League groups could transfer into the Conference League knockout round play-offs.
Chelsea and Crystal Palace competed under the current league-phase format.
Roma: Somebody Had to Become the First
When Roma entered the inaugural Conference League in 2021, there was no history attached to winning it.
There were no previous champions.
No famous Conference League finals.
No legendary comeback from a decade earlier.
No club could point toward an earlier winner and decide what lifting the trophy was supposed to mean.
Somebody had to go first.
Roma’s journey began before the group stage, but it quickly became far messier than the eventual championship might suggest.
The Italian club reached the group stage and appeared to be one of the obvious contenders.
Then came Bodø/Glimt.
On Oct. 21, 2021, Roma traveled to Norway and suffered a stunning 6–1 defeat.
It was the first time a José Mourinho-coached team had conceded six goals in an official match.
For a club with Roma’s profile, losing was one thing.
Losing 6–1 to a Norwegian opponent few casual European football viewers would have considered comparable in stature was something entirely different.
And Bodø/Glimt was not finished.
The return match in Rome ended 2–2.
Roma eventually finished first in the group, one point ahead of Bodø/Glimt, but the two teams would meet yet again in the quarter-finals.
The first leg was back in Norway.
Bodø/Glimt won 2–1.
At that point, Roma had faced the Norwegian club three times during the season and had failed to win any of them.
Then came the response.
Back at the Stadio Olimpico, Roma produced a 4–0 victory.
The team that had beaten Roma 6–1 earlier in the competition was finally overwhelmed.
Roma advanced 5–2 on aggregate.
Leicester City followed in the semifinal.
After a 1–1 draw in England, Tammy Abraham scored in Rome as Roma won 1–0 and advanced 2–1 on aggregate.
That sent Mourinho’s team to Tirana to face Feyenoord.
Nicolò Zaniolo scored in the 32nd minute.
Roma protected the lead.
The final finished 1–0.
Roma became the inaugural Conference League champion and captured its first major UEFA club competition trophy.
That journey is more interesting because of what happened before the final.
Roma did not simply enter a new competition, dominate it from beginning to end and become the obvious first champion.
They were beaten 6–1.
They went three matches without defeating Bodø/Glimt.
They lost the first leg of the quarter-final.
And still they became the team whose name appears first on the list of Conference League champions.
Today, the competition has previous winners to provide reference points.
Roma had none.
The club helped create the first one.
West Ham: The Work Before the Spotlight
West Ham’s 2022–23 Conference League campaign is remembered for one moment more than any other.
Prague.
The final against Fiorentina was tied 1–1 as the 90th minute approached.
Lucas Paquetá slipped a pass behind the Fiorentina defense.
Jarrod Bowen ran onto it.
Bowen scored.
West Ham won 2–1.
For the first time since the Cup Winners’ Cup in 1965, West Ham had captured a major European trophy.
But Prague only happened because of everything that came before it.
West Ham did not receive a direct place in the group stage.
They had to qualify.
Their opponent was Viborg.
West Ham won the first leg 3–1 in London.
A two-goal advantage was significant.
It was not qualification.
The job still had to be finished in Denmark.
West Ham won the second leg 3–0.
The 6–1 aggregate victory put them into the group stage.
Then the momentum grew.
West Ham won all six group matches.
Eighteen points from 18.
They defeated FCSB, Silkeborg and Anderlecht home and away.
The perfect group-stage record allowed them to bypass the knockout round play-offs and move directly into the round of 16.
AEK Larnaca was eliminated 6–0 on aggregate.
Gent provided a much greater challenge.
The first leg in Belgium finished 1–1.
Back in London, West Ham won 4–1, taking the quarter-final 5–2 on aggregate.
AZ Alkmaar came next.
West Ham won the first leg 2–1.
Then they traveled to the Netherlands and won 1–0, completing a 3–1 aggregate semifinal victory.
The final awaited.
One of the more interesting elements of West Ham’s run was that David Moyes did not need to turn every European match into an attacking exhibition simply because his team represented the Premier League.
In key knockout matches, West Ham could defend deep, stay compact and attack quickly in transition.
They could allow opponents possession in less dangerous areas and force them to solve an organized structure.
Set pieces offered another weapon.
That could create an unusual problem for opponents expecting a Premier League club to dominate the ball and attack relentlessly.
The stronger team on paper did not always have to play like the more aggressive team.
What mattered was finding the approach that gave West Ham the best chance to advance.
And advance they did.
West Ham finished the Conference League campaign with 14 wins, one draw and no defeats, including qualifying.
The unbeaten run makes the Prague celebration even more impressive.
But the most glamorous part of the story should not erase the least glamorous part.
There is no final without Viborg.
There is no Bowen winner without the August qualifying round.
There is no trophy lift without the work that came months before anybody knew Prague would become the destination.
The final produced the moment everybody remembers.
The work that made it possible started much earlier.
Olympiacos: The Opportunity Changed, but the Season Wasn’t Over
Olympiacos did not begin the 2023–24 season expecting the Conference League to become the setting for one of the greatest nights in Greek football history.
They began in the Europa League.
And even reaching that competition required qualifying.
Olympiacos entered in the Europa League third qualifying round and beat Genk 2–1 on aggregate.
Čukarički came next in the play-off.
Olympiacos won 6–1 on aggregate and entered the Europa League group stage.
There they finished third behind West Ham and Freiburg.
Under the competition format used at the time, third place meant the Europa League campaign was finished.
The European season was not.
Olympiacos transferred into the Conference League knockout round play-offs.
Their original European objective had changed.
The opportunity had not disappeared.
Ferencváros was the first Conference League opponent.
Olympiacos won 1–0 at home.
Then they won 1–0 away.
A controlled 2–0 aggregate victory moved them into the round of 16.
Then came Maccabi Tel Aviv.
And suddenly, the second European opportunity appeared close to disappearing too.
Maccabi won the first leg 4–1 in Piraeus.
Olympiacos had conceded four goals at home.
The situation looked disastrous.
The response was extraordinary.
Olympiacos won the return leg 6–1 after extra time.
The Greek club advanced 7–5 on aggregate.
The comeback became one of the defining results in Conference League history.
Next came Fenerbahçe.
Olympiacos won the first leg 3–2.
Fenerbahçe responded with a 1–0 victory in Istanbul.
The aggregate score was 3–3.
Extra time changed nothing.
Penalties decided it.
Olympiacos survived the shootout.
Then came Aston Villa.
On paper, the Premier League club represented another enormous test.
Olympiacos went to England and won 4–2.
Rather than merely protecting the advantage at home, they won again 2–0.
Olympiacos advanced 6–2 on aggregate.
The club that had finished third in its Europa League group was now one victory away from a European trophy.
Fiorentina awaited in the final.
There was another layer to the story.
The match was being played in Athens.
Not at Olympiacos’ own stadium, but in the same city where Greek football history was about to be made.
Ninety minutes passed without a goal.
Extra time arrived.
The match moved toward penalties.
Then, in the 116th minute, Ayoub El Kaabi scored.
Olympiacos led 1–0.
Minutes later, it was over.
Olympiacos had become the first Greek senior men’s club to win a major UEFA club competition.
The remarkable part of their journey is not simply that they respected the Conference League after leaving the Europa League.
It is how many times the opportunity nearly disappeared after they arrived.
The 4–1 home defeat to Maccabi.
The penalty shootout against Fenerbahçe.
The Premier League semifinal opponent.
A final that remained scoreless until the 116th minute.
Nothing about the path suggested inevitability.
Olympiacos did not control how they arrived in the Conference League.
They controlled what they did once they got there.
Video Courtesy of TNT Sports Football YouTube
Chelsea: Being the Favorite Is Not the Same as Being Champion
Chelsea entered the 2024–25 Conference League carrying expectations unlike any previous champion.
They did not need to prove that the club belonged in European football.
Chelsea had already won the Champions League.
The Europa League.
The Cup Winners’ Cup.
The UEFA Super Cup.
This was a club with enormous resources, squad depth and European pedigree.
Chelsea was the giant in the field.
But even Chelsea did not receive automatic admission to the league phase.
First came Servette.
Chelsea won 2–0 at Stamford Bridge.
Then Servette won the return match 2–1 in Switzerland.
Chelsea advanced 3–2 on aggregate.
The favorite had survived qualifying.
Once the league phase began, Chelsea looked much more like the dominant force many people expected.
Gent: 4–2.
Panathinaikos: 4–1.
Noah: 8–0.
Heidenheim: 2–0.
Astana: 3–1.
Shamrock Rovers: 5–1.
Six matches.
Six victories.
Eighteen points.
First place.
The knockout rounds followed.
Chelsea beat Copenhagen 3–1 on aggregate.
Legia Warszawa came next.
Chelsea won the first leg 3–0 away and appeared completely in control.
Then Legia went to Stamford Bridge and won 2–1.
Chelsea still advanced 4–2 on aggregate, but the defeat reinforced something Servette had already demonstrated.
Having the strongest squad did not make Chelsea incapable of losing individual matches.
Djurgården came next.
Chelsea won the semifinal 5–1 on aggregate.
Now only Real Betis stood between Chelsea and the trophy almost everyone expected them to win.
The final did not begin according to that script.
Betis scored first.
Chelsea went into halftime trailing 1–0.
The favorite had to respond.
It did.
Enzo Fernández equalized.
Nicolas Jackson put Chelsea ahead.
Jadon Sancho added a third.
Moisés Caicedo completed the scoring.
Chelsea won 4–1.
The club finished the competition proper with 12 wins from 13 matches and 42 goals.
And the trophy completed another piece of European history.
Chelsea became the first club to win all five of UEFA’s major men’s senior club competitions.
That is what made Chelsea’s challenge different.
Roma had no previous Conference League champion to follow.
Olympiacos had to adapt after its original European route changed.
Chelsea had to deal with an entirely different burden:
Everybody expected them to win.
Being the favorite can create advantages.
It can also create a situation in which success is treated as inevitable while failure becomes magnified.
Chelsea’s resources mattered.
Their squad depth mattered.
Their European experience mattered.
But none of those advantages physically placed the trophy in the cabinet.
Servette still beat them.
Legia still beat them.
Betis still scored first in the final.
Expectation was not the result.
Chelsea still had to produce it.
Crystal Palace: The Competition Changed, but the Opportunity Remained
Crystal Palace entered the 2025–26 Conference League under circumstances unlike any of the four champions before them.
Their European story began with an FA Cup.
Palace defeated Manchester City 1–0 in the 2025 FA Cup final, with Eberechi Eze scoring the winning goal.
It was the first FA Cup triumph in club history.
By winning the competition, Crystal Palace qualified on sporting merit for the 2025–26 Europa League.
That was supposed to be the destination.
Instead, an off-field issue changed the path.
UEFA determined that Crystal Palace and Olympique Lyonnais were non-compliant with its multi-club ownership rules at the March 1, 2025 assessment date.
Lyon retained admission to the Europa League.
Palace was placed into the Conference League instead.
Crystal Palace appealed.
The Court of Arbitration for Sport dismissed that appeal in August 2025.
The ruling became final.
Palace would play in the Conference League.
That created an unusual combination of achievement and disappointment.
They had won the FA Cup.
They had qualified on sporting merit for the Europa League.
Then circumstances away from the field changed the competition.
But being redirected into the Conference League did not provide an automatic league-phase place.
Palace still had to qualify.
Fredrikstad was the opponent.
Palace won the first leg 1–0 at Selhurst Park.
The second leg in Norway finished 0–0.
One goal across 180 minutes was enough.
Crystal Palace advanced 1–0 on aggregate.
Then came the league phase.
Unlike Chelsea one year earlier, Palace did not dominate it.
They finished 10th with 10 points.
That kept them alive but meant they missed the top eight and therefore had to enter the knockout phase play-offs.
Zrinjski came first.
Palace advanced 3–1 on aggregate.
AEK Larnaca followed.
The first leg finished 0–0.
The second required extra time.
Palace won 2–1.
Then came Fiorentina.
Few clubs knew the Conference League better.
Fiorentina had reached consecutive finals in 2023 and 2024, losing first to West Ham and then to Olympiacos.
Palace won the first leg 3–0 at home.
Fiorentina won the return 2–1.
Palace advanced 4–2 on aggregate.
The semifinal opponent was Shakhtar Donetsk.
Palace won the first leg 3–1 away.
Then they won 2–1 at home.
The 5–2 aggregate victory put Crystal Palace into its first major European final.
Rayo Vallecano awaited in Leipzig.
The first half finished scoreless.
Then Jean-Philippe Mateta scored in the 51st minute.
That was enough.
Palace won 1–0.
The club’s debut season in a major UEFA competition had ended with its first European trophy.
Their route had been far from perfect.
They qualified 1–0 on aggregate.
Finished 10th in the league phase.
Needed the knockout play-offs.
Required extra time against AEK Larnaca.
Lost the second leg against Fiorentina.
None of that prevented the final outcome.
Palace kept surviving.
And eventually surviving became winning.
The strangest part of the story is that this was not even the competition Crystal Palace originally expected to enter.
The FA Cup opened the Europa League door.
The multi-club ownership ruling closed it.
Palace challenged that decision and lost.
Then they had to decide what to do next.
By the end of the season, the competition that had initially represented a step down from the Europa League had become the stage for the first European trophy in club history.
Crystal Palace did not get the European competition it originally expected.
It still made history with the opportunity that remained.
Five Champions, Five Different Meanings
The first five Conference League champions did not arrive at the trophy through the same circumstances or the same path.
That is precisely what makes their stories useful together.
Roma became the inaugural champion after suffering one of the tournament’s most shocking defeats along the way.
West Ham started in qualifying and went through the entire campaign unbeaten.
Olympiacos arrived after its Europa League path ended and then survived a series of elimination threats before becoming Greece’s first major UEFA club champion.
Chelsea arrived as the obvious favorite and converted enormous expectations into results.
Crystal Palace expected to play in a different European competition altogether before eventually turning the Conference League into one of the greatest seasons in club history.
The trophy was the same.
Its meaning was not.
The Business Lesson
Organizations often spend enormous amounts of energy comparing opportunities.
Which client is bigger?
Which market is more prestigious?
Which platform has the largest audience?
Which project will receive the most attention?
Which opportunity looks best from the outside?
Those questions can matter.
But the first five Conference League champions suggest another question is sometimes more useful:
What can you actually build from the opportunity in front of you?
Roma could not wait for the Conference League to develop decades of prestige before deciding whether becoming its first champion mattered.
Someone had to create the first reference point.
West Ham could not skip the qualifying work because the final looked more glamorous.
The final existed because the earlier work had been completed.
Olympiacos could not restore its Europa League campaign.
It could only decide what to do with the European opportunity that remained.
Chelsea could not exchange its reputation, resources or previous trophies for an automatic championship.
Those advantages created expectations.
Execution still had to create the result.
Crystal Palace could not change UEFA’s ruling once its appeal was exhausted.
It could decide how seriously to treat the competition it was actually playing.
Those are five very different circumstances.
And that is important.
The lesson is not that every opportunity is equal.
Some opportunities clearly carry greater financial value.
Some markets are larger.
Some clients have more strategic importance.
Some platforms offer more reach.
But organizations should be careful not to confuse smaller with meaningless, unexpected with useless, or less prestigious with not worth pursuing.
A smaller opportunity can provide experience.
An unfamiliar one can reveal capabilities.
An unexpected change can create another path.
Work completed before anyone is watching can create the moment everyone eventually notices.
And sometimes the opportunity an organization did not originally want becomes the one people remember most.
The stage changes.
The expectations change.
The route changes.
The responsibility to execute does not.
Five clubs reached the same trophy from five very different starting points.
There was no single blueprint.
There was only the next challenge.
That may be the clearest lesson from the Conference League’s first five champions:
Opportunity does not have one correct starting point.
What matters is what you build from the one you receive.
Graphics created with AI-assisted design tools.
Visual concepts, editorial direction, composition, and final creative decisions were developed by Vallano Media.
The Door Is Open — But Nobody Walks Straight Through It
By Cheval John | Vallano Media
This article was created with the assistance of artificial intelligence.
The final version was reviewed, edited and fact-checked by the author
Graphics created with AI-assisted design tools.
Visual concepts, editorial direction, composition, and final creative decisions were developed by Vallano Media.
When most people think about European club football, their attention naturally goes to the league phase.
That is when the standings become easier to follow.
The television coverage increases.
Bigger clubs enter the weekly conversation, and supporters start calculating what their teams need to survive into the knockout rounds.
But looking only at the league phase misses one of the most important characteristics of the UEFA Conference League.
Before 36 clubs can play those six matches, they have to get there.
And unlike the Champions League and Europa League, nobody receives a direct place in the Conference League league phase.
For 2026/27, UEFA says all 36 Conference League participants enter the league phase through qualifying.
By comparison, 29 clubs qualify directly for the Champions League league phase, while 13 receive direct places in the Europa League.
The Conference League number is zero.
That does not mean all 36 clubs follow the same route.
Some begin in Conference League qualifying.
Others start their European campaigns in the Champions League or Europa League before moving downward after elimination.
But everyone has a road to travel.
That makes qualifying more than something happening before the competition begins.
Qualifying is part of the Conference League’s identity.
The Qualifying Rounds: Everybody Has a Road to Travel
The road begins in July.
Conference League qualifying for 2026/27 began on July 7 and concludes with the play-off second legs on August 27.
UEFA’s qualifying rounds are contested over two legs, home and away.
The numbers show how much football occurs before the final 36 is assembled.
The first qualifying round contained 52 clubs in the main path.
The second round expanded to 98 clubs: 12 in the champions path and 86 in the main path.
That group included teams entering the tournament at that stage, 26 first-round winners and clubs arriving after elimination from higher UEFA competition.
By the third qualifying round, the field had narrowed to 60 clubs — eight in the champions path and 52 in the main path.
Nine of those main-path clubs entered after losing in the Europa League second qualifying round.
Then comes the final hurdle.
The Conference League play-off contains 48 clubs: 10 in the champions path and 38 in the main path.
Only five clubs enter the Conference League directly at this stage.
Even those five do not receive league-phase places.
They receive the opportunity to play for one.
That distinction is important.
The Conference League creates another route into European football.
It does not remove the work required to turn that opportunity into a place among the final 36.
Ajax: History Does Not Skip the Line
Few clubs illustrate that better this season than Ajax.
The Dutch club has won the European Cup or Champions League four times — in 1971, 1972, 1973 and 1995 — along with the UEFA Cup and the former Cup Winners’ Cup.
None of that shortened Ajax’s 2026/27 route.
Ajax entered the Conference League in the second qualifying round and defeated Vojvodina 8–2 on aggregate.
In the third round, Ajax beat Shelbourne 5–3 on aggregate.
Only after four qualifying matches did the club reach the play-off, where Sion now stands between Ajax and the league phase.
History gives Ajax prestige.
It gives the club recognition.
It gives generations of supporters memories nobody can erase.
It does not provide a shortcut into this league phase.
The name on the shirt still has to win the tie.
Even the Biggest Domestic Leagues Must Qualify
The five clubs entering directly at the play-off stage demonstrate the point in a different way.
Atalanta represents Italy.
Brighton & Hove Albion represents England.
Freiburg represents Germany.
Getafe represents Spain.
Monaco represents France.
All five enter at the final qualifying stage rather than directly into the league phase.
Their play-off opponents are Hapoel Tel-Aviv, Tromsø, Motherwell, Partizan and Górnik Zabrze respectively.
These are clubs coming from five of Europe’s most prominent domestic leagues.
Yet the requirement is exactly the same: win the tie.
That makes the structure particularly interesting.
Domestic-league reputation can influence expectations surrounding a matchup, but it does not eliminate the qualification requirement.
Different Roads Can Lead to the Same Place
There is also an important distinction behind the statement that all 36 clubs arrive through qualifying.
Not all 36 will win a Conference League play-off.
Twenty-four league-phase places go to the winners of the 24 Conference League play-off ties.
The other 12 are filled by the clubs that lose in the Europa League play-offs.
UEFA sends those defeated teams directly into the Conference League league phase.
One club may therefore reach the final 36 after surviving several Conference League rounds.
Another may have spent the summer trying to reach the Europa League and arrive in the Conference League only after losing its final play-off.
Different roads.
Same destination.
The Conference League does not require everybody to travel the same road.
It requires everybody to have a road to travel.
The Play-Off Round: No Safety Net
The play-off may be the most revealing stage of the entire competition.
The equation is brutally simple.
Win the tie and reach the league phase.
Lose and the European season ends.
UEFA confirms that Conference League play-off winners advance while the defeated clubs are eliminated.
That creates an important contrast with UEFA’s two competitions above it.
A Champions League play-off loser transfers directly into the Europa League league phase.
A Europa League play-off loser transfers directly into the Conference League league phase.
A Conference League play-off loser transfers nowhere.
Champions League play-off loser → Europa League league phase
Europa League play-off loser → Conference League league phase
Conference League play-off loser → Europe is over
There is no fourth UEFA competition underneath.
There is no safety net.
Brighton and the Danger of Assuming Too Much
Many observers will naturally expect Brighton to advance against Tromsø.
That expectation is understandable.
Brighton comes from the Premier League and will enter the tie with the resources associated with one of world football’s wealthiest domestic competitions.
But Tromsø brings a very different advantage into the matchup.
The Norwegian club is already in the middle of its domestic campaign.
Tromsø played Molde in Eliteserien Round 18 on August 16, just days before hosting Brighton in the first leg on August 20.
Brighton may possess the stronger squad on paper.
Tromsø enters with competitive matches already in its legs.
That does not make Tromsø the favorite.
It does make the idea that a Premier League club can simply walk through the tie far too simplistic.
European qualifying is not settled by television contracts, payrolls or league reputations.
It is settled across two matches.
And if Brighton loses those two matches, another European competition will not be waiting.
Their European season will be over.
Atalanta: Yesterday’s Trophy Cannot Win Tomorrow’s Tie
Atalanta provides another striking example.
The Italian club won the 2023/24 Europa League, defeating Bayer Leverkusen 3–0 in the final and capturing its first European honour.
Video Courtesy of CBS Sports Golazo
Two seasons later, Atalanta still has to defeat Hapoel Tel-Aviv to reach the Conference League league phase.
That is not an argument that the Conference League carries greater prestige than the Europa League.
It clearly does not.
It demonstrates something simpler.
Previous success establishes reputation.
It does not complete the next qualifying tie for you.
Hibernian Keeps Reaching the Door
Hibernian provides the opposite kind of story.
The Scottish club has repeatedly reached the final hurdle without crossing it.
In 2023/24, Hibernian reached the Conference League play-off and met Aston Villa.
Villa won 8–0 on aggregate.
Two seasons later, Hibernian returned.
This time the margin was dramatically smaller.
Legia Warszawa advanced 5–4 on aggregate after extra time.
Now Hibernian is back again.
Gent stands between the club and the league phase in what is Hibernian’s third Conference League play-off appearance in four seasons.
That history illustrates something that can disappear when qualifying is treated as preliminary football.
A club can qualify for Europe domestically.
Survive earlier rounds.
Reach the final doorway.
Do it again.
And still never enter the league phase.
Getting to the door is not the same as opening it.
Rangers Shows How the Competitions Connect
Rangers demonstrates another part of UEFA’s interconnected system.
The Scottish club entered the Europa League third qualifying round but was beaten 3–2 on aggregate by Jagiellonia Białystok.
UEFA’s format sends Europa League third-round losers into the Conference League play-offs, giving Rangers another European opportunity against Jablonec.
This is precisely how the three competitions interact.
A setback higher in the system can create another opportunity lower down.
But eventually those opportunities run out.
Rangers has reached that point.
Beat Jablonec and the European season continues.
Lose and it ends.
That is also where questions about whether established clubs will “take the Conference League seriously” really begin.
They have to take the qualifying round seriously first.
The League Phase: What Clubs Finally Earn
After all of that, 36 clubs finally reach the league phase.
The nature of the competition changes immediately.
Instead of another two-legged elimination tie, every club plays six different opponents — three at home and three away — and all 36 are ranked together in one table.
The top eight advance directly to the round of 16.
Clubs ranked ninth through 24th enter the knockout phase play-offs, while teams finishing 25th through 36th are eliminated.
For clubs that have spent the summer living one bad tie away from elimination, that provides something qualifying does not: room to recover.
One poor league-phase night does not necessarily destroy the entire campaign.
There are other opponents.
Other matches.
Other opportunities to collect points.
Qualifying gives a club admission.
The league phase gives it time to compete.
Jagiellonia: When European Experience Starts to Compound
Jagiellonia Białystok offers one of the most interesting examples of what repeated European participation can become.
The Polish club reached the Conference League league phase in 2024/25 and eventually advanced to the quarter-finals, where Real Betis eliminated it 3–1 on aggregate.
Jagiellonia returned the following season.
Again, it survived beyond the league phase.
Fiorentina finally eliminated the Polish club 5–4 on aggregate after extra time, despite Jagiellonia winning the second leg in Florence 4–2.
Now the progression has moved another step.
After eliminating Rangers, Jagiellonia has reached the 2026/27 Europa League play-off, where it faces Iberia Tbilisi.
This time Jagiellonia already knows it will be in a UEFA league phase.
Beat Iberia and it enters the Europa League league phase.
Lose and UEFA’s play-off rules send it directly into the Conference League league phase.
Either outcome means a third consecutive season in the league phase of a UEFA competition.
That does not prove the Conference League single-handedly caused the club’s progression.
It shows something more measured — and more useful.
European participation can become recurring rather than temporary.
A club can reach the Conference League.
Return.
Build familiarity with European opponents and schedules.
And eventually find itself competing for a place one level higher.
The Conference League can be a destination.
It can also become part of a longer journey.
There Is Still a Trophy at the End
There is another reason reaching the league phase matters.
There is a UEFA trophy waiting at the end.
Five clubs have won the Conference League since its launch: Roma, West Ham United, Olympiacos, Chelsea and Crystal Palace.
Chelsea became the first club to win all of UEFA’s major senior men’s club competitions, while Crystal Palace won the 2025/26 edition.
Their circumstances and routes were very different.
That is why their stories deserve an article of their own.
For now, they establish a simpler point.
The Conference League is not merely a collection of extra European fixtures.
Survive long enough and there is a continental championship at the end.
And winning it opens another door.
The 2026/27 champion receives a place in the 2027/28 Europa League league phase, provided the club has not already qualified for the Champions League or Europa League through its domestic competition.
Europe’s third competition can therefore provide a route into its second.
The Business Lesson
There is a reason this structure matters beyond football.
Organizations often focus on the most visible part of success.
The launch.
The contract.
The promotion.
The major client.
The finished project.
The moment when everyone else finally starts paying attention.
What receives less attention is everything that happened beforehand.
The preparation.
The smaller opportunities.
The failed attempts.
The adjustments.
The work completed while very few people were watching.
Conference League qualifying makes that process unusually visible.
Most casual viewers will eventually notice the league phase.
They may see Ajax.
They may see Brighton or Atalanta.
They will see standings and knockout races.
Eventually they will see somebody lift the trophy.
But those moments exist only because somebody survived what came before them.
For Ajax, European history does not remove the qualifying rounds.
For Brighton, Premier League status does not make Tromsø irrelevant.
For Hibernian, repeatedly reaching the final obstacle has not yet been enough to cross it.
For Jagiellonia, repeated participation has become a third consecutive UEFA league-phase season and an opportunity to compete one level higher.
The situations are different, but the principle is remarkably similar.
Access creates opportunity.
Preparation helps you reach it.
Performance determines what you do once you arrive.
The Conference League opens European competition to a wider collection of clubs.
But opening the door is not the same as carrying someone through it.
Thirty-six teams will eventually stand on the other side.
Some will come from the largest leagues in Europe.
Others will represent clubs and countries that rarely receive the same international attention.
Some will carry famous European trophies in their history.
Others may be experiencing the biggest continental matches their supporters have ever seen.
Their roads will not look the same.
But they will share one thing.
Nobody was simply given a Conference League league-phase place.
The door was open.
They still had to earn their way through it.
Graphics created with AI-assisted design tools.
Visual concepts, editorial direction, composition, and final creative decisions were developed by Vallano Media.
The Stage Changes Everything: What the Champions League, Europa League and Conference League reveals
By Cheval John | Vallano Media
This article was created with the assistance of artificial intelligence.
The final version was reviewed, edited and fact-checked by the author
Graphics created with AI-assisted design tools.
Visual concepts, editorial direction, composition, and final creative decisions were developed by Vallano Media.
European football tends to be discussed as a hierarchy.
The Champions League sits at the top.
The Europa League occupies the next level.
The Conference League sits beneath both.
That hierarchy is real. The financial structure alone demonstrates the difference.
Under UEFA’s 2024/25 distribution plan, each club reaching the Champions League league phase could expect a starting allocation of €18.62 million before performance and value-pillar payments.
The corresponding starting allocations were €4.31 million (estimated $4.67 million) in the Europa League and €3.17 million (estimated $3.39 million) in the Conference League.
UEFA’s projected distribution plan provided €2.467 billion (estimated $2.66 billion) for Champions League and UEFA Super Cup participants, compared with €565 million (estimated $590 million) for the Europa League and €285 million (estimated $324 million) for the Conference League.
UEFA stressed that those amounts were projections based on anticipated revenue and that final distributions depended on actual receipts.
But hierarchy is not the same thing as usefulness.
A stage does not have to be the biggest stage in the world to be the right stage for the organization standing on it.
That is what makes UEFA’s three men’s club competitions interesting beyond football.
Each provides a different kind of opportunity.
The Champions League can amplify.
The Europa League can provide a bridge.
The Conference League can open a door.
Three competitions.
Three different levels of exposure.
One underlying lesson:
The value of the platform depends on what you are prepared to build from it.
The Champions League: The Amplifier
There is no need to manufacture an argument about the scale of the Champions League.
Beginning in 2024/25, UEFA moved the competition to a 36-club league phase, with each team playing eight different opponents — four matches at home and four away.
Each league-phase participant could expect the €18.62 million (estimated $19.88 million) starting allocation before additional payments tied to results, final league position and the competition’s value pillar.
For Europe’s established giants, reaching the Champions League is often expected.
That makes it easy to overlook what the same platform can mean when a club reaches it for the first time.
Brest: From No European History to the Champions League
Stade Brestois provides one of the clearest recent examples.
Before 2024/25, Brest had never qualified for European competition.
The club finished third in Ligue 1 in 2023/24 — its highest league finish ever — earning entry into the Champions League.
UEFA noted that RB Leipzig in 2017 had previously made its European debut in the Champions League proper, with Brest and Girona joining that unusual category in 2024.
There was no gradual introduction.
No Conference League campaign first.
No Europa League apprenticeship.
Brest’s first European match in club history came in the Champions League, where they defeated Sturm Graz 2–1 on September 19, 2024.
They did more than appear.
Brest finished the league phase with four wins, one draw and three defeats, placing 18th and advancing to the knockout phase play-offs against Paris Saint-Germain.
That is where the Champions League becomes more than a football competition for a club experiencing it for the first time.
The underlying organization did not suddenly become Real Madrid because Champions League branding appeared around its matches.
Brest remained Brest.
But the context surrounding the club changed.
The opponents changed.
The level of competition changed.
The economic scale changed.
The potential audience and media reach surrounding the club changed.
The platform amplified what Brest had already built strongly enough to earn.
That distinction matters.
The Champions League did not create Brest’s breakthrough.
Their domestic performance earned access to a platform capable of magnifying it.
And that is what the biggest platforms often do.
They do not build the underlying organization for you.
They expose it.
The Risk of Reaching the Biggest Stage
Exposure works both ways.
A larger stage can magnify strengths, but it can also expose weaknesses.
Operations face greater demands.
Media scrutiny increases.
Commercial expectations can rise.
Supporter expectations can change.
For businesses, the comparison is useful because growth is often treated as automatically positive.
More customers.
More followers.
A larger contract.
National exposure.
A major partnership.
But exposure arriving before an organization is prepared for it can turn opportunity into strain.
The lesson from the Champions League is therefore not simply:
Get onto the biggest stage possible.
It is:
Build something capable of surviving once the spotlight reaches it.
The Europa League: The Bridge
The Europa League occupies an unusual position.
It is not the Champions League.
But describing it simply as Europe’s second competition misses what makes it valuable.
It can function as a bridge.
Under UEFA’s current structure, 36 clubs compete in the Europa League league phase, each playing eight matches.
UEFA’s 2024/25 distribution plan provided €565 million for participating clubs, with each league-phase club set to receive a €4.31 million starting allocation before performance and other payments.
There is also a powerful structural incentive.
The Europa League champion earns a place in the following season’s Champions League league phase when that club has not already qualified through its domestic competition.
That makes the Europa League more than a destination.
It can create a route upward.
Atalanta: Turning Progress Into Proof
Atalanta’s 2023/24 campaign demonstrates what that middle platform can represent.
By 2024, Atalanta were already established European participants under Gian Piero Gasperini.
They had competed in three consecutive Champions League campaigns from 2019/20 through 2021/22, reaching the quarter-finals during their debut season and the round of 16 the following year.
But one thing remained missing.
A European trophy.
That changed on May 22, 2024.
Atalanta faced Bayer Leverkusen in the Europa League final in Dublin. Leverkusen entered the match unbeaten in 51 consecutive games across all competitions.
Atalanta won 3–0.
Ademola Lookman scored all three goals.
The victory ended Leverkusen’s unbeaten run and delivered the first European trophy in Atalanta’s history.
It was also the Italian club’s first UEFA competition final.
The importance of that achievement was not that Atalanta suddenly became a serious football organization overnight.
Their development had been visible for years.
The Europa League supplied something different.
Confirmation.
Atalanta had already shown that their model could repeatedly produce teams capable of competing in Europe.
Dublin provided undeniable proof that the model could produce a European champion.
That distinction matters in business.
There is a stage where potential attracts attention.
There is another where consistent work creates credibility.
And then there are moments when an organization gets the opportunity to prove that the progress is real.
Atalanta had already built credibility.
The trophy confirmed it.
Tottenham: Another Route to the Next Level
The 2024/25 Europa League showed another side of the competition.
Tottenham Hotspur defeated Manchester United 1–0 in the final in Bilbao on May 21, 2025.
The victory ended Tottenham’s 17-year wait for silverware and delivered the club’s first European trophy since 1984.
It also earned Spurs a place in the following season’s Champions League league phase.
That is one of the more interesting features of European football’s structure.
There can be more than one route to the next level.
A club can reach the Champions League through domestic league performance.
Or a team can arrive there by winning the Europa League.
Businesses often fall into the trap of assuming there is one correct ladder.
Reach a certain revenue number.
Hire a certain number of employees.
Raise investment.
Build a huge social following.
Follow whatever path another successful company followed.
Football provides a reminder that progress rarely works that neatly.
Sometimes the route available to you is not the one you originally imagined.
The question is whether you recognize its value while you are standing in it.
That is the Europa League’s place in this framework.
It is not merely the competition below the Champions League.
It is a legitimate stage with its own value — and sometimes a bridge to something larger.
The Conference League: The Open Door
When UEFA introduced the Conference League in 2021/22, much of the discussion centered on where the new tournament sat within the organization’s club competition hierarchy.
UEFA described its purpose differently.
When the competition was approved, UEFA President Aleksander Čeferin said the new structure would create more matches for more clubs and representation for more associations.
UEFA said the structure introduced in 2021/22 guaranteed representation from at least 34 national associations across the group stages of its club competitions.
The financial scale of the Conference League is smaller than the competitions above it.
That is undeniable.
UEFA’s 2024/25 distribution plan provided €285 million (estimated $324 million) for Conference League participants, with a €3.17 million (estimated $3.39 million) starting allocation for each club reaching the league phase.
But judging the competition only by comparing its money with the Champions League misses the point.
A platform should also be judged relative to the organization receiving access to it.
For some clubs, reaching the Conference League does not represent moving downward.
It represents reaching a stage they have never reached before.
KÍ Klaksvík: When a Club Becomes a National Story
Few clubs demonstrate that better than KÍ Klaksvík.
In 2023, KÍ became the first club from the Faroe Islands to reach the group stage of a UEFA club competition.
Klaksvík has a population of roughly 5,000, and UEFA reported that most of KÍ’s players combined football with employment or study.
After navigating Champions League and Europa League qualifying, the Faroese champions secured their historic Conference League place.
Then came October 26, 2023.
KÍ defeated Olimpija Ljubljana 3–0, becoming the first Faroese club to win a UEFA group-stage match.
For a club representing one of UEFA’s smallest national associations, a result like that creates something valuable:
Proof.
Proof that the club can reach the stage.
Proof that the organization can operate within it.
Proof for supporters that a Faroese club can carry a European campaign beyond the qualifying rounds and onto a UEFA group-stage schedule.
KÍ did not suddenly become one of Europe’s wealthiest clubs.
Their underlying identity did not change.
What changed was the size of the platform displaying it.
A bigger stage does not automatically create an identity.
Sometimes it simply makes an existing one visible.
Breiðablik: Value Without the Perfect Result
Breiðablik’s 2023/24 campaign provides a different lesson.
The Icelandic club began its European season in Champions League qualifying and eventually reached the Conference League group stage, joining KÍ among the newcomers in the 2023/24 field.
UEFA’s official draw included Breiðablik alongside Gent, Maccabi Tel Aviv and Zorya Luhansk in Group B.
Once the matches began, the results were difficult.
Breiðablik lost all six group games.
Their opening match against Maccabi Tel Aviv ended in a 3–2 defeat, and the campaign never produced the victory the club wanted.
There is no reason to disguise that.
In fact, the losses strengthen the argument.
European exposure does not magically erase differences in budgets, squad depth or competitive level.
Sometimes reaching the room is part of the achievement.
That is something businesses frequently discover when they enter a larger market.
Access and immediate dominance are not the same thing.
You can earn the opportunity and still discover how much further you have to go.
That does not make the opportunity worthless.
The experience creates information.
It creates benchmarks.
It shows an organization where the gap actually exists instead of where it imagined the gap existed.
Sometimes growth starts with discovering what the next level really demands.
Olimpija Ljubljana: Rebuilding Into Relevance
Olimpija Ljubljana represents another version of the story.
The club’s current incarnation began in 2005 as NK Bežigrad following serious problems surrounding the previous organization.
The new project began in Slovenia’s fifth tier, won that division in its first season and climbed quickly.
The club gained the right to use the Olimpija name in 2007 and became NK Olimpija Ljubljana in 2008.
By 2023/24, Olimpija had reached the Conference League group stage.
They were not Slovenia’s first club at that level of the competition.
Mura had already participated in the inaugural Conference League group stage and defeated Tottenham 2–1 in November 2021.
But Olimpija’s own trajectory remains significant.
A football operation rebuilt from the fifth tier had returned to domestic prominence and European competition.
The club won Slovenia’s national championship again in 2024/25.
That is where the business comparison becomes useful.
Branding is often discussed as if it begins with advertising.
A logo.
A campaign.
A social-media strategy.
But credibility usually begins earlier.
It begins with becoming operationally good enough to keep appearing in places that matter.
One appearance creates curiosity.
Repeated appearances can create expectation.
Bodø/Glimt: When Opportunity Compounds
Bodø/Glimt takes the idea much further.
The Norwegian club’s rise did not happen through one competition or one breakthrough.
During the inaugural Conference League season in 2021/22, Bodø/Glimt reached the quarter-finals.
They kept qualifying for Europe.
They later reached the Europa League semi-finals in 2024/25.
Video Courtesy of Copa 90 YouTube Channel
Then came the Champions League.
In 2025/26, Bodø/Glimt reached the Champions League proper and eventually eliminated Inter 5–2 on aggregate in the knockout phase play-offs, advancing to the round of 16.
Their run finally ended against Sporting CP.
Bodø/Glimt carried a 3–0 advantage into the second leg before Sporting won 5–0 after extra time in Lisbon, taking the tie 5–3 on aggregate.
The financial progression has been striking as well.
FK Bodø/Glimt’s 2025 annual report recorded total club income of NOK 808.8 million (estimated $85 million).
Importantly, the club’s own accounts show why the story should not be oversimplified: NOK 495.3 million (estimated $39 million) of that income came from the 2024/25 Europa League semifinal campaign and qualification plus the first six league-phase matches of the 2025/26 Champions League.
That detail prevents us from telling the wrong story.
The Conference League did not single-handedly transform Bodø/Glimt.
Domestic performance mattered.
Player development mattered.
Recruitment mattered.
Management mattered.
Later Europa League and Champions League success mattered enormously.
The Conference League was one stage in a much longer progression.
That is what compounding opportunity looks like.
Repeated European campaigns build institutional experience.
Successful performances can increase player visibility.
Recurring international exposure can give a club a stronger story to bring into commercial discussions.
And each new stage becomes slightly less unfamiliar than the one before it.
Eventually, outsiders look at the organization and forget how different the starting point once was.
The Business Lesson
The easiest way to misunderstand European football is to assume that only the biggest competition matters.
The easiest way to misunderstand business is to make the same mistake.
Not every useful opportunity looks like the Champions League.
Sometimes your Champions League moment really does arrive.
A national client.
A major contract.
A huge audience.
A partnership capable of changing the scale of the company.
When it does, the job is to be ready for the amplification.
Sometimes the opportunity looks more like the Europa League.
It may not be the ultimate destination, but it can provide credibility, proof and a route toward something larger.
And sometimes it looks like the Conference League.
Smaller audience.
Less money.
Less prestige.
But perhaps it is the first serious platform that has ever opened its doors to you.
That opportunity should not be dismissed merely because someone else is playing on a bigger stage.
KÍ Klaksvík did not need to become Real Madrid for its European breakthrough to matter.
Brest did not need decades of Champions League history before its first campaign became meaningful.
Atalanta did not need to win Europe’s largest competition for its first European trophy to validate years of progress.
Bodø/Glimt did not move from a smaller Scandinavian football market to the Champions League knockout rounds in one jump.
The stages were different.
The principle was the same.
Use the platform you have well enough that you are prepared when the next one opens.
Because the biggest mistake is not competing on a smaller stage.
It is standing on a useful one while spending all your time wishing you were somewhere else.
Graphics created with AI-assisted design tools.
Visual concepts, editorial direction, composition, and final creative decisions were developed by Vallano Media.
The Fallout: What FIFA’s Governance Debate Could Mean for the Future of World Football
Part II of the FIFA Governance Series
Reading Time: 10–11 minutes
By Cheval John | Vallano Media
This article was created with the assistance of artificial intelligence.
The final version was reviewed, edited and fact-checked by the author
Also, this is the second installment in Vallano Media’s two-part series examining the FIFA Forward Enterprise proposal and its aftermath.
The first feature examined how the proposal unfolded and why it was ultimately withdrawn.
This follow-up explores the governance, leadership, and institutional questions that emerged in the days that followed.
As with the first article, this analysis is based on official statements and reporting from reputable news organizations.
Where developments remain unconfirmed or are based on reporting from unnamed sources, they are clearly identified as such.
AI-generated conceptual illustration created for Vallano Media with assistance from OpenAI’s ChatGPT.
When FIFA withdrew its proposed FIFA Forward Enterprise initiative on July 31, 2026, the organization brought an end to one of the most ambitious commercial proposals in its history.
The decision closed the immediate debate over the initiative itself, but it also marked the beginning of a much broader conversation about governance, leadership, and institutional trust within world football.
In the days following the withdrawal, the conversation changed just as quickly as the proposal itself had disappeared.
Rather than debating the proposal’s commercial merits, football organizations, journalists, and administrators increasingly examined how it had been developed, communicated, and ultimately withdrawn. The focus had shifted from the proposal itself to the decision-making process behind it.
That transition reflected a recurring theme that had already emerged during the proposal’s collapse.
Organizations from different regions expressed differing views about the proposal itself, yet many of them emphasized similar concerns regarding transparency, consultation, and accountability
Those principles continued to dominate the conversation even after the proposal had been withdrawn, suggesting that the governance process had become just as significant as the initiative itself.
As the story evolved, attention also turned toward FIFA’s leadership.
Reports from reputable news organizations described growing political activity among national football associations, confederations, and senior football officials as they assessed what the proposal’s withdrawal could mean for the organization’s future.
At the same time, FIFA officials publicly addressed the controversy while emphasizing the organization’s long-term mission and its responsibility to serve football around the world.
The developments also highlighted a reality that is often overlooked outside football governance.
FIFA’s president is not elected by clubs, leagues, broadcasters, or supporters.
The organization’s leadership is determined by its 211 member associations, each holding one vote regardless of the size, commercial influence, or competitive success of its domestic football market.
As a result, building international relationships and maintaining support across every continent remain central to FIFA’s governance.
Understanding that structure is essential to understanding what followed the withdrawal of the FIFA Forward Enterprise proposal.
The debate had evolved from a discussion about a commercial initiative into a broader examination of leadership, institutional confidence, and governance within one of the world’s largest sporting organizations.
The proposal had ended, but the conversation surrounding FIFA’s future was only beginning.
From Commercial Proposal to Political Fallout
The withdrawal of the FIFA Forward Enterprise proposal did not end the conversation surrounding the initiative.
Instead, it marked the beginning of a broader debate over governance, consultation, and institutional decision-making within world football.
During the days that followed, attention shifted away from the proposal’s financial objectives and toward the process by which it had been introduced.
Football organizations, national associations, and industry stakeholders increasingly focused on questions of transparency, communication, and stakeholder engagement. For many observers, the governance process itself had become the central issue.
That shift was reflected in the public responses from organizations across the global football landscape.
While opinions differed on the proposal’s potential benefits, a recurring concern emerged regarding how major decisions should be developed and presented within an organization representing 211 member associations across every continent.
Several football bodies emphasized the importance of consultation before implementing significant institutional changes.
Those statements reinforced the idea that successful governance depends not only on the substance of a proposal but also on the confidence that stakeholders have in the process leading to that proposal.
As reporting continued to emerge, the discussion expanded beyond the initiative itself.
Questions surrounding leadership, institutional trust, and the future direction of FIFA increasingly became part of the public conversation.
Coverage from respected international news organizations examined both the external reactions from confederations and national associations and the reported internal response from senior FIFA officials.
The controversy also demonstrated how quickly the focus of a major international story can evolve. What began as a discussion about a commercial initiative soon became a broader examination of organizational governance.
The proposal itself was no longer the primary subject of debate.
Instead, attention centered on how decisions were made, how stakeholders were consulted, and how one of the world’s most influential sporting organizations responded when faced with widespread scrutiny.
This transition provides important context for understanding the developments that followed.
The conversation had moved beyond a single proposal and toward larger questions about leadership, accountability, and the governance of world football.
Those issues would continue to shape discussion long after the proposal had been withdrawn.
The Global Battle for 211 Votes
To many football supporters, FIFA presidential elections remain largely out of public view until the final vote is announced.
Behind the scenes, however, the election of the organization’s president is shaped by one of the most distinctive governance systems in international sport.
Unlike many domestic leagues, where influence is often associated with financial strength, commercial success, or competitive performance, FIFA operates on a principle that gives every member association an equal vote in choosing the organization’s leadership.
Whether representing one of football’s traditional powers or one of the sport’s smallest developing nations, each of FIFA’s 211 member associations casts one vote in the FIFA presidential election.
That principle has long been one of the defining characteristics of FIFA’s governance and reflects the organization’s commitment to representing football on a truly global scale.
This voting structure also means that presidential elections are decided through broad international coalitions rather than the influence of a single region.
Support must be built across every confederation, requiring candidates to maintain relationships with associations representing diverse football cultures, priorities, and levels of development.
As discussion surrounding the FIFA Forward Enterprise proposal shifted toward leadership, that structure became increasingly important to understanding the political landscape.
Reports from several respected news organizations indicated that national associations in different regions were reassessing their positions as debate surrounding
FIFA’s leadership intensified.
Public discussion frequently focused on developments within Europe, yet reporting also highlighted conversations involving associations in Asia, Africa, CONCACAF, South America, and Oceania.
Understanding FIFA’s electoral system helps explain why those developments should not be viewed in isolation.
Public criticism from one confederation does not automatically determine the outcome of a FIFA presidential election.
Although continental organizations often provide leadership on important issues, each member association ultimately decides how it will cast its vote.
That distinction is fundamental to understanding FIFA politics.
As reporting continued to develop, attention shifted from one region to another.
One day, headlines focused on Europe.
The next, they highlighted developments involving Asia, Africa, or other confederations.
Rather than reflecting contradiction, those reports illustrated the complexity of FIFA’s global political structure, where support is built across continents and alliances can evolve over time.
This broader perspective also helps explain why political developments surrounding FIFA rarely follow a straightforward path.
Organizations representing different regions often have unique priorities, governance concerns, and strategic interests.
As a result, public statements may differ even while the same underlying governance questions continue to shape the conversation.
For readers unfamiliar with international football governance, the rapid pace of developments may have appeared confusing.
In reality, they reflected the dynamics of an organization whose leadership is determined through a worldwide voting system rather than by a single league, federation, or confederation.
The aftermath of the FIFA Forward Enterprise proposal therefore became more than a debate about one initiative.
It became a reminder that FIFA’s governance is shaped by a global network of member associations whose collective decisions ultimately determine both the organization’s leadership and the future direction of world football.
In FIFA, every member association has one vote. Understanding that principle is essential to understanding FIFA politics.
The significance of that governance structure became even more apparent as the controversy evolved.
While external reactions continued to dominate headlines, reporting from several respected news organizations also began offering a rare glimpse into how senior figures inside FIFA were responding to the events unfolding around the organization.
Inside FIFA: A Rare Public Glimpse During a Governance Crisis
As reactions from confederations and national football associations continued to shape the public debate, another dimension of the story gradually emerged: reported insight into how FIFA’s senior leadership responded internally to the controversy.
While official statements outlined the organization’s public position, several respected news organizations also reported on communications and comments from senior FIFA officials in the days following the withdrawal of the FIFA Forward Enterprise proposal.
Together, those reports offered a rare glimpse into how the organization sought to address one of the most closely watched governance debates in recent years.
One of the most significant developments came through reporting by Sky News, which reported obtaining an internal message from FIFA Secretary General Mattias Grafström to FIFA staff.
According to Sky News, Grafström described the previous days as “extraordinary and challenging,” characterizing the events as “a sad and reproachable series of events” that were “difficult to comprehend and accept.”
According to the report, Grafström encouraged FIFA employees to remain focused on the organization’s mission despite the public controversy.
He emphasized FIFA’s responsibility to serve its 211 member associations and reiterated the importance of continuing the organization’s work during a period of intense international attention.
If accurately reported, the communication provides a rare insight into how FIFA’s executive leadership sought to reassure employees while navigating one of the organization’s most significant governance debates in recent years. Internal communications of this nature are seldom made public, making the reported message particularly noteworthy.
Another significant development involved Arsène Wenger, FIFA’s Chief of Global Football Development.
In comments reported by The Telegraph, Wenger stated that he had not participated in developing the FIFA Forward Enterprise proposal and that he first became aware of it through media reports.
He also expressed support for FIFA’s decision to withdraw the initiative, describing that decision as “absolutely necessary” while emphasizing the importance of independence, transparency, and integrity within football governance.
Wenger’s reported comments provided additional context to the broader discussion.
Rather than addressing the political debate surrounding FIFA’s leadership, they focused on governance principles and clarified his own role in relation to the proposal.
That distinction illustrates how different senior figures responded to different aspects of the controversy.
Viewed together, the reported comments from Grafström and Wenger highlight an important point.
The conversation following the withdrawal of the proposal was no longer limited to criticism from confederations, leagues, and national associations.
It had also prompted public responses from senior FIFA officials, each addressing different aspects of the controversy while reinforcing the organization’s broader mission and responsibilities.
At the same time, reporting from multiple international news organizations described continued political activity surrounding FIFA’s leadership.
Public statements from football administrators, former officials, and national associations reflected the growing significance of the governance debate.
However, those developments also underscored the importance of distinguishing between official statements, reported developments, individual opinions, and independently verified facts.
Although the reported comments from senior FIFA officials should not, on their own, be interpreted as evidence of institutional division, they demonstrate how the conversation had expanded well beyond the original commercial proposal.
Governance, communication, leadership, and organizational confidence had become central themes in the broader discussion surrounding FIFA’s future.
For observers of international sport, that shift may prove to be one of the lasting legacies of the FIFA Forward Enterprise episode.
While proposals can be withdrawn, the questions they raise about leadership, consultation, and institutional trust often continue long after the immediate controversy has passed.
While proposals can be withdrawn, the questions they raise about leadership, consultation, and institutional trust often continue long after the immediate controversy has passed.
As the political debate continued to unfold, the broader significance of the controversy extended beyond FIFA itself.
The events surrounding the proposal raised larger questions about how international sporting organizations balance innovation, stakeholder consultation, and institutional trust in an increasingly interconnected world.
Beyond the Proposal: Lessons for Global Sports Governance
Although the FIFA Forward Enterprise proposal was ultimately withdrawn, the broader questions it raised are unlikely to disappear.
Throughout the debate, football organizations from different regions expressed differing opinions about the proposal itself.
Yet despite those differences, several common themes consistently emerged.
Public statements from confederations, leagues, and other football stakeholders repeatedly emphasized the importance of consultation, transparency, and institutional accountability when considering significant changes to the governance of the global game.
Those principles extend well beyond FIFA.
International sporting organizations oversee competitions watched by billions of people while balancing the interests of athletes, clubs, leagues, broadcasters, sponsors, supporters, commercial partners, and hundreds of member associations.
Decisions affecting that global ecosystem involve far more than financial considerations.
They also help shape confidence in the institutions responsible for governing international sport.
The events surrounding the FIFA Forward Enterprise proposal demonstrated how quickly the conversation can evolve when stakeholders believe they have not been sufficiently consulted.
What began as a discussion about a commercial initiative gradually became a broader examination of governance processes, organizational leadership, communication, and institutional trust.
In many respects, the governance process itself became the story.
As football continues to evolve through expanding international competitions, commercial partnerships, technological innovation, and new investment opportunities, similar governance questions are likely to emerge again.
The challenge for every international governing body will be balancing innovation with meaningful consultation while maintaining the confidence of the organizations and individuals affected by those decisions.
For journalists, the episode also reinforces an enduring lesson.
Fast-moving international stories often generate breaking headlines, anonymous sourcing, conflicting interpretations, and rapidly evolving developments.
Helping readers distinguish between official statements, independently verified reporting, reported allegations, and informed analysis remains one of journalism’s most important responsibilities.
That principle has guided this two-part series from the beginning.
Rather than attempting to predict the outcome of FIFA’s ongoing political discussions, these articles have sought to document the proposal, explain the reactions it generated, and examine the governance questions that emerged in its aftermath.
As with any developing international story, new information may continue to emerge.
However, the importance of transparency, consultation, and institutional trust will remain relevant regardless of how FIFA’s leadership evolves.
The FIFA Forward Enterprise proposal may have been withdrawn, but the questions it raised have become part of a broader conversation about the future of governance in world football.
Regardless of future elections or institutional reforms, the events of 2026 have already provided an important case study in how one of the world’s largest sporting organizations responds to periods of significant change and public scrutiny.
For readers, the story serves as a reminder that governance is often most visible during moments of controversy.
Yet its greatest influence is felt in the decisions, relationships, and processes that shape organizations long before headlines are written.
Understanding those processes provides valuable context not only for following FIFA, but also for understanding how leadership and accountability influence international sport as a whole.
AI-generated conceptual illustration created for Vallano Media with assistance from OpenAI’s ChatGPT.
Sources
This feature is based on official statements, governing body communications, and reporting from reputable international news organizations.
Official documents were used whenever available, with independent reporting providing additional context throughout the story.
Official Sources
FIFA – FIFA intends to expand football development funding to over USD 10 billion subject to approval by FIFA Member Associations
UEFA – Official Statements and Newsroom
Asian Football Confederation (AFC) – Official News
CONCACAF – Official News
CONMEBOL – Official News
European Leagues – Official News
FIFPRO – Official News and Statements
Independent Reporting
Reuters – FIFA scraps World Cup sell-off plan after resistance from members
Reuters – Infantino holds crisis meeting in Morocco as fallout continues
Associated Press – Coverage of the FIFA governance dispute
Sky News – Reporting on Mattias Grafström’s internal message to FIFA staff
The Telegraph – Reporting on Arsène Wenger’s comments regarding the FIFA Forward Enterprise proposal
Why American Players Should Focus On Development in Smaller European Leagues
By Cheval John | Vallano Media
This article was created with the assistance of artificial intelligence.
The final version was reviewed, edited and fact-checked by the author
Graphics created with AI-assisted design tools.
Visual concepts, editorial direction, composition, and final creative decisions were developed by Vallano Media.
When American soccer fans talk about players moving to Europe, the conversation usually begins with the biggest clubs.
Fans dream about seeing the next U.S. star wearing the colors of Real Madrid, Manchester City, Bayern Munich or AC Milan.
There is nothing wrong with having those ambitions.
The challenge is understanding that the biggest club is not always the best place for a young player to develop.
For many American players, the smartest career move may not be immediately joining one of Europe’s giants.
It may be finding a club where they can play consistently, learn from mistakes and develop into complete professionals.
That opportunity can often be found outside Europe’s most glamorous leagues.
Playing Time Is an Opportunity to Learn
Soccer development is built through experience.
Training with elite teammates matters, but competitive matches force players to make decisions when points, jobs and results are at stake.
Young players have to read situations quickly, follow tactical instructions, respond to mistakes and adjust to opponents who are actively trying to exploit their weaknesses.
That is why leagues in countries such as the Netherlands, Belgium, Austria, Denmark, Norway and Switzerland deserve more attention when American players consider moving overseas.
These competitions do not need to be described as inherently “better” development leagues than Major League Soccer.
That would be too broad.
Their value is that particular clubs within them can provide young players with combinations of playing time, coaching, tactical exposure and pathways toward larger European competitions.
For a prospect, opportunity can matter more than prestige.
Development Over the Biggest Name
A famous club badge can be attractive, but a player’s career is built on more than the reputation of his employer.
A young player who joins a powerhouse but rarely plays may find himself needing another move to continue his development.
Another player might choose a less glamorous club, establish himself in the starting lineup and eventually earn the larger transfer anyway.
Neither path guarantees success.
The larger point is that young players should evaluate the environment, not simply the name.
How likely are they to play?
Does the club have a record of trusting young players?
Does the tactical system fit their strengths?
Is there a realistic pathway to greater responsibility?
Those questions may tell us more about the value of a move than the size of the stadium.
European Experience Is Already Central to the USMNT
The U.S. Men’s National Team provides a useful illustration.
U.S. Soccer’s official 26-player roster from the 2026 FIFA World Cup listed 17 players with European clubs.
The Europe-based group included Sergiño Dest and Ricardo Pepi at PSV Eindhoven, Christian Pulisic at AC Milan, Weston McKennie at Juventus, Tyler Adams at Bournemouth, Antonee Robinson at Fulham, Chris Richards at Crystal Palace and others spread across England, France, Germany, Italy, Scotland, Spain and the Netherlands.
That does not prove that playing in Europe automatically makes someone a better player.
It demonstrates something narrower and more useful: European club experience has become a major part of the pathway into the American national-team pool.
The paths themselves are revealing.
Pepi moved from MLS to Augsburg in Germany and later found another opportunity in the Netherlands with PSV.
Dest has played for Ajax, Barcelona, AC Milan and PSV.
Malik Tillman’s journey has taken him through Germany, Scotland and the Netherlands.
By the 2026 World Cup, U.S. Soccer listed him with Bayer Leverkusen in Germany.
Different players required different environments.
That is exactly the point.
The objective should not simply be “get to Europe.”
It should be find the European environment that makes sense for the player.
That European influence was visible when the United States faced Bosnia and Herzegovina in the Round of 32 of the 2026 World Cup.
Nine of the 11 American starters were with European clubs according to U.S. Soccer’s roster listings; goalkeeper Matt Freese was with New York City FC and defender Tim Ream with Charlotte FC.
Europe was therefore an important part of the team’s makeup without being its only development route.
That distinction matters.
Video Courtesy of CBS Golazo YouTube Channel
What the United States Can Learn From Croatia
Croatia provides a useful comparison, but not because its development system perfectly matches what American players should do.
It doesn’t.
Croatia instead demonstrates the broader principle that the right developmental step can matter more than reaching the biggest possible club immediately.
Luka Modrić, for example, went from Dinamo Zagreb to Tottenham Hotspur before eventually reaching Real Madrid.
UEFA documents that progression directly.
Croatia’s development structure has helped produce players capable of competing at extraordinary levels internationally.
The country reached the 2018 World Cup final and finished third four years later.
FIFA noted the scale of that accomplishment for a nation of fewer than four million people.
Croatia should therefore be treated as a parallel lesson rather than direct proof of the smaller-league argument.
Its lesson is about sequencing development correctly.
Build the player. Give him meaningful experience. Then move him when the next challenge makes sense.
Morocco Shows the Value of Multiple Development Pathways
Morocco offers another perspective.
At the 2022 World Cup, Morocco became the first African nation and first Arab nation to reach the semifinals.
Its national team drew from players shaped in multiple football environments rather than one uniform domestic pathway.
That diversity matters because international soccer constantly requires adaptation.
Opponents bring different tactical systems, rhythms and individual qualities.
Again, the lesson is not that playing abroad automatically creates international success.
Morocco’s achievement depended on coaching, organization, talent, execution and many other factors.
But its example shows that a national team can benefit from players whose club careers expose them to different football cultures.
For the United States, with a player pool spread across MLS, Mexico and numerous European leagues, that is an especially relevant model.
Smaller Leagues Are Not Smaller Opportunities
The term “smaller league” can also be misleading.
It describes commercial profile and global attention more easily than developmental value.
The Dutch Eredivisie, Belgian Pro League and leagues in Austria, Denmark, Norway and Switzerland may operate outside Europe’s traditional Big Five, but their clubs can still provide meaningful professional environments and routes into UEFA competition.
The current 2026-27 UEFA Conference League illustrates the geographic breadth of those opportunities.
Its league phase includes Ajax and Twente from the Netherlands; Gent and Sint-Truidense from Belgium; four Danish representatives; Brann from Norway; and Lugano and Thun from Switzerland.
The Europa League’s 2026-27 league phase likewise includes clubs from the Netherlands, Belgium, Austria and Norway.
For an American player, therefore, moving to one of these leagues does not necessarily mean disappearing from meaningful continental competition.
It can mean playing domestic matches while also getting opportunities to face clubs and tactical styles from elsewhere in Europe.
And under UEFA’s current format, these competitions use a league phase, not the old group-stage structure.
European Competition Adds Another Test
Playing in UEFA competition should not be presented as a guarantee that someone will handle a World Cup better.
That causal claim would go beyond the evidence.
What can be said is that continental competition gives players additional experiences.
They travel internationally.
They encounter unfamiliar opponents.
They play matches in different environments.
They face situations in which preparation time may be limited and tactical adjustment becomes important.
Those are useful professional experiences.
For young American players, they can become another layer of development alongside domestic league matches and national-team responsibilities.
The Business Lesson: Growth Depends on Environment
There is also a lesson here that extends beyond soccer.
Businesses frequently confuse visibility with progress.
A company can chase rapid expansion, a prestigious client or the largest possible market before its internal systems are ready.
Sometimes that works.
Sometimes the smarter decision is to build capability first.
A smaller opportunity that gives a company room to learn, improve its systems and understand its customers can eventually create the foundation for a much larger opportunity.
A young soccer player’s career can work similarly.
Joining a globally famous club looks impressive.
But if another club offers greater responsibility, regular competition and a clearer developmental pathway, the supposedly smaller opportunity may actually be the more strategic one.
That does not mean thinking small.
It means understanding sequencing.
In business and soccer, the question is not merely, “How big is the opportunity?”
It is also, “What will this opportunity help us become?”
The Future of American Soccer Requires Smart Choices
American soccer no longer needs to prove that its players can reach Europe.
They already have.
The more interesting question is what happens after they arrive.
Some players will be ready for one of Europe’s major leagues immediately.
Others might benefit from the Netherlands, Belgium, Austria, Denmark, Norway, Switzerland or another competition where a specific club can offer the right role.
MLS will remain an important part of the American development system as well.
This should not become a simplistic Europe-versus-MLS debate.
It is a player-development debate.
The best decision is the one that puts the individual in an environment where talent can turn into performance.
Croatia demonstrates the value of a well-sequenced development pathway.
Morocco demonstrates the strength that can come from players shaped through different football cultures.
And the USMNT’s own player pool shows how deeply European club experience has become integrated into American soccer.
The United States should build on that progress without assuming that the most famous destination is automatically the best one.
Sometimes the road to the biggest stage begins somewhere less glamorous.
A smaller stadium.
A less famous club.
A league that receives fewer American television headlines.
But if that environment gives a player the opportunity to compete, develop and prepare for the next challenge, it may not be a small opportunity at all.
It may be exactly the right one.
Graphics created with AI-assisted design tools.
Visual concepts, editorial direction, composition, and final creative decisions were developed by Vallano Media.
Share this: