By Andrea Caropreso
Index
Follow us on social media to stay updated on the latest transfer news: Instagram, Facebook, and X.
“A 16-team Serie A, like in 1986, would avoid those matches with just a few thousand viewers on TV that weaken the commercial credibility of our football. Many argue that we would earn less, but that’s not true, because the value of the other matches would increase.”
These were the strong words of Napoli’s president, Aurelio De Laurentiis, on the ever-debated issue of reducing the number of teams in the league. But in economic terms, what would be the advantages and disadvantages of a smaller Serie A?
Historical Background
Serie A returned to 20 teams in the 2004/2005 season, arguably the last period when the league was highly competitive and perhaps even the best in the world. That first expanded season was also the only one in which the gap between those fighting for European spots and those battling relegation was truly minimal. Just six points separated Bologna, relegated with 42 points, from Messina, who finished seventh.
In the following years, the general state of Serie A declined dramatically, and consequently, the value of TV rights deals dropped to three-year cycles (recently extended to five). This decline in quality, worsened by the aftermath of Calciopoli, meant that the football system generated fewer revenues, causing financial strain on Italian clubs. As a result, TV rights became central, since today most clubs’ revenues come from sponsorships and broadcasting.
What are the advantages?
When the league’s quality drops, the cost of TV rights is lower compared to, say, the Premier League. This means smaller revenue to share among the clubs. Here lies the core of the debate between top clubs and smaller sides.
Serie A presidents have always argued that fewer matches mean fewer revenues from broadcasters, so they consistently voted against reducing the league to 18 teams. Yet what many decision-makers fail to understand is that “less is often more,” and “more is not always better.” As De Laurentiis pointed out, the viewership for teams like Sassuolo, Pisa, Lecce, Cremonese, or Verona is much lower compared to the “seven sisters.”
In recent years, European football revenues have grown significantly (+16% in 2022/23), and Serie A also improved (+22%), reaching nearly €3 billion in total turnover. Economically, a reduction to 18 or even 16 teams would not only allow for a less congested calendar but also greater profits, especially for top clubs. This is because Serie A does not distribute TV revenues equally but rather considers factors such as fan base, audience, and historical results.
Therefore, the big clubs would earn more by splitting the pie among fewer teams, while smaller clubs would suffer. Still, supporters of the reduction argue that increased appeal and revenue could benefit everyone compared to the current 20-team model.
Costs and losses of a reduced Serie A
On the flip side, fewer teams also mean fewer matches, and therefore, less ticket revenue.
Estimated losses for a 16-team Serie A
| Club | Avg. revenue per match (€) | Loss with 2 fewer matches (€) |
|---|---|---|
| Hellas Verona | ~672,000 | –1.34M |
| Lecce | ~625,000 | –1.25M |
| Udinese | ~480,000 | –0.96M |
| Sassuolo | ~240,000 | –0.48M |
While this doesn’t impact top clubs significantly, for newly promoted or smaller teams, such revenue losses could be substantial. In fact, a reduced calendar could lead to a 19% drop in TV revenue.
However, taking the NFL as an example, the American league has deliberately limited the number of games (17) to make each one highly valuable. Similarly, fewer Serie A games could make every single match more appealing, potentially boosting viewership.
Perspectives
For now, no immediate changes are on the horizon, despite pressure from top clubs. Still, it’s important to note that reducing the number of teams wouldn’t solve all of Italian football’s problems. Serie A lags behind in infrastructure, youth development, and facilities.
Even leading clubs like Napoli lack state-of-the-art training centers or a stadium of their own. Meanwhile, Inter and AC Milan have been debating for years about building a new stadium to match Europe’s elite. UEFA president Aleksander Ceferin recently criticized Italian stadiums as “terrible,” a concern Italy must address as it prepares to host Euro 2032.
By Andrea Caropreso
