Liverpool owners Fenway Sports Group could get some of what they had hoped to achieve through the European Super League plot after controversial Champions League reforms reportedly returned to the table.
FSG were one of the 12 clubs to attempt to launch the breakaway ESL last year, six of which came from the Premier League. But all six renounced their involvement in the project within 48 hours of its launch, with Liverpool principal owner John Henry recording a video apology to fans over the plans.
Since then the Reds have made their stance clear with regards to the potential of another super league move at some stage in the future, maintaining that they have ended their intentions and nothing has changed, despite the continued efforts of Real Madrid, Barcelona and Juventus in the courts to try and make sure that the path is clear for such a competition to rise unchallenged in the future.
READ MORE: Liverpool nearly banked unexpected transfer windfall thanks to Burnley after selling £6.5m striker
Liverpool's owners have also attempted to show their commitment to not going back to another similar plot in the future through the creation of a Supporters Board, one where several Reds fan groups, including the Spirit of Shankly, will have to give consent for any such moves in the future, or any that impact club traditions, such as moving away from Anfield or changing the club crest. The need for consent would be binding even with a change of ownership and would be written into the articles of association of the club.
That means that there are barriers in place to stop any attempt at an ESL move happening in the future, or at least if it did it would have to meet with the approval of fans. But one of the elements of the super league that had appealed to FSG was the removal of the jeopardy when it came to potentially missing out on the Champions League, something that seemed a very real threat to Liverpool at one stage last year and one that would have had a significant impact on the club's bottom line, with the Reds having already earned more than £80m from their run in the competition so far.
When the reforms to the Champions League from 2024 were discussed, one of the major sticking points was the potential to allow two clubs who missed out on qualifying for the competition, due to their domestic season, being afforded the chance to enter through their historic performance in European football's elite tournament, thus giving the very biggest clubs something of a safety net should they have a poor campaign and miss out on automatic qualification.
Those proposals are something that UEFA have rejected previously, although major changes are planned to the Champions League through the 'Swiss Model', where the number of teams will be increased from 32 to 36, a league format will exist and more games will be played, ergo creating more revenue from the competition for clubs, with a bumper media deal set to arrive in time for the introduction of the revamped tournament in 2024.
But those plans for historic performance to potentially allow for teams to qualify without merit are back on the agenda, according to The Guardian. The report claims that members of the European Club Association, an organisation which includes 10 Premier League sides including Liverpool, and one that the Reds left temporarily last year after their ESL move, are to lobby UEFA to allow two teams to qualify for the Champions League based in part on their coefficient, which takes into account performance in the competition over a five-year period.
The report claims that the proposals would see clubs who finish outside the Champions League places in their domestic leagues, but qualify for the Europa League or win a domestic cup, compete for two places, which would then be decided by coefficient ranking. It is expected to be discussed when UEFA convenes for its General Assembly in Vienna later this week.
When quizzed on the potential inclusion of qualification for clubs based on their coefficient, UEFA president Aleksander Ceferin, speaking at the Financial Times' Business of Football Summit in London at the start of March, said: "It is completely different thing.
"We are discussing with all our stakeholders, we are discussing with the leagues, we are discussing with the clubs, the ECA. It is not 'Super League-ish', it is everything but the Super League. We have not clarified the final decision, but for anyone to compare the reform of the Champions League to the Super League is not serious.
"We have 32 teams in the Champions League now and the plan is to have 36. It will be more places for smaller and mid-sized teams."
