For all the talk of how ultra-wealthy, state-backed clubs have conquered European football, this year’s Champions League final offers a blast from the past, with two fan-controlled teams vying for the game’s top accolade.
The match between Real Madrid and Borussia Dortmund, which will be played in front of 86,000 fans at Wembley Stadium on Saturday night, is the first time since 2017 that Europe’s biggest final will be without at least one team owned by billionaires or a sovereign state.
Real will be gunning for a 15th European title, while Dortmund, the underdogs, could win their second. To reach the final, both had to overcome an opponent bankrolled by a petrostate. The Spanish champions edged past Abu Dhabi-backed Manchester City in the quarterfinals, while Dortmund saw off Qatar-owned Paris Saint-Germain in the semis.
On the pitch, it’s clear that Europe’s old guard can still compete with the best of football’s nouveau riche, while governing bodies now acknowledge that checking the might of sovereign wealth is vital for the long-term health of the game.
Of course, Real and Dortmund are hardly paupers. According to Deloitte, the Spanish champions had the highest revenue in world football last year, while the German side ranked 12th.
Despite being member-owned, Real have still been able to bring in capital from outside investors through a partnership with US private equity firm Sixth Street, and have had no trouble in attracting and paying top players such as England’s Jude Bellingham, who signed last summer from Dortmund for €100mn. He is set to be joined imminently by French superstar Kylian Mbappé, who is quitting PSG in search of the European glory that has eluded the club despite Qatar’s billions.
In home leagues, state-backed clubs remain dominant. Manchester City just notched up a sixth Premier League title in seven years, while Paris Saint-Germain have now added 10 French championships to the trophy cabinet since being bought by Qatar Sports Investment in 2011.
As ever in football, luck played a vital role in shaping Saturday’s contest. Real needed a penalty shootout to beat City in the quarterfinals, while Dortmund withstood a barrage of attacks from PSG in the semis. There was a moment in time when a Qatar vs Abu Dhabi finale looked more likely than not.
But as football’s governing bodies start to put the squeeze on spending, the financial firepower of state-owned clubs should, in theory, lose some of its potency.
In the Premier League — where 115 allegations of spending rule breaches still hang over City — a new financial regime is on the horizon. Next week, clubs will vote on potential reforms, including one to limit spending by top teams depending on income generated by those at the bottom.
This season saw the introduction of new financial rules by Uefa, European football’s governing body, that limit the amount a team can spend on its playing staff to 90 per cent of revenue. The “squad cost” rule will be tightened next season to 80 per cent of income, and again the following year to 70 per cent.
Such rule changes will not make European trophies more accessible to a wider group of clubs. Indeed some of them, such as the squad cost rule that ties spending to revenue, are more likely to cement the status quo by making it harder to break into the elite.
Uefa already rewards a club’s pedigree. About a third of Champions League prize money is allocated based on performance in the tournament over the previous five years. That’s why Saudi-owned Newcastle United’s earnings from its appearance in the group stages of the contest this season were significantly lower than those of Champions League regulars.
Lax financial regulation left the door open for City and PSG to buy their way into football’s elite. A tightening of the rules will test whether new money can still change the sport’s balance of power.