How the 2026/27 Champions League Fields Were Filled
See how 7 women’s and 16 men’s requests became 6 and 13 approvals, and how fixed places and titleholder access completed both fields.
The 2026/27 EHF Champions League lineups reduce to two equations: 10 fixed places + six approved upgrades = 16 women’s teams, while 10 fixed places + European League winner MT Melsungen + 13 approved upgrades = 24 men’s teams. Six of seven women’s upgrade requests and 13 of 16 men’s requests were approved. The EHF identified every outcome, but it did not publish club-level scores or reasons for unsuccessful applications in its official lineup announcement.
The numbers at a glance
| Competition | Submitted | Approved | Not confirmed |
|---|---|---|---|
| Women | 7 | 6 | 1 |
| Men | 16 | 13 | 3 |
Those decisions produced a 16-team women’s field arranged in two groups of eight and a 24-team men’s field arranged in six groups of four. The men’s competition therefore expands from 16 to 24 teams, while the women’s competition remains at 16.
The qualification arithmetic is:
Women: 10 fixed places + 6 approved upgrades = 16 teams
Men: 10 fixed places + MT Melsungen + 13 approved upgrades = 24 teams
The EHF announced the final decisions on 22 June 2026, before the group-phase draw scheduled for 26 June. The dates left four days between confirmation of the fields and the draw.
The essential distinction is that not every club entered through the same qualification route. A fixed national place, titleholder access and an approved upgrade can all lead to the group phase, but they are separate categories and should not be counted interchangeably.
From 27 men’s registrations to a 24-team field
The men’s lineup began with 27 registered clubs, even though the expanded competition had room for only 24. Registration described the complete pool of stated entrants and applicants; it did not guarantee that all 27 clubs would participate.
The registration funnel consisted of:
- 10 guaranteed national champions
- MT Melsungen, admitted as the 2025/26 EHF European League Men winner
- 16 clubs that submitted upgrade requests
The arithmetic was therefore:
10 guaranteed champions + 1 titleholder entrant + 16 upgrade applicants = 27 registrations
Once the 10 fixed-place teams and MT Melsungen were counted, 13 places remained for the 16 upgrade applicants. That necessarily left three applicants outside the final field:
27 registrations − 24 competition places = 3 clubs not admitted
The applications also came from two types of federation. Ten were submitted by clubs from seven federations that already had fixed Champions League places, while six came from countries without a fixed place. Together with the guaranteed champions and MT Melsungen, that breakdown accounts for all 27 registrations in the EHF registration announcement.
Submitting an upgrade request did not create an automatic Champions League place. It made a club eligible for evaluation, with admission dependent on approval. The registration total could therefore exceed the number of places available.
MT Melsungen must also be kept outside the upgrade count. Its confirmed route arose from winning the 2025/26 EHF European League Men. For this lineup, the club was the titleholder entrant—not one of the 13 clubs admitted through approved upgrade requests.
Which upgrade requests were approved?
The EHF uses the formulation “not confirmed” for the unsuccessful applications. That wording is important because the announcement does not assign a club-specific reason to any of those outcomes.
Women’s upgrade requests
| Approved | Not confirmed |
|---|---|
| Odense Håndbold | Molde Elite |
| Nykøbing Falster Håndbold | |
| BV Borussia Dortmund | |
| FTC | |
| Sola Handballklubb | |
| CSM Bucuresti |
Six of the seven women’s upgrade applications were approved. Those six clubs joined the 10 fixed-place teams to complete the 16-team field.
Men’s upgrade requests
| Approved | Not confirmed |
|---|---|
| SAH Aarhus | MOL Tatabánya KC |
| GOG | Valur |
| HBC Nantes | Elverum Håndball |
| Montpellier Handball | |
| Füchse Berlin | |
| OTP Bank–PICK Szeged | |
| HC Vardar 1961 | |
| Orlen Wisla Plock | |
| FC Porto | |
| RK Celje Pivovarna Lasko | |
| RK Partizan AdmiralBet | |
| HC Kriens-Luzern | |
| IFK Kristianstad |
The official list of confirmed and not-confirmed requests records 13 approved men’s upgrades and three unsuccessful applications. The 13 successful applicants filled every place left after the 10 fixed-place teams and MT Melsungen had been included.
Nothing in the published outcomes establishes why Molde Elite, MOL Tatabánya KC, Valur or Elverum Håndball was not confirmed. Attributing an individual decision to sporting performance, venue standards, media considerations, federation limits or any other specific factor would go beyond the available evidence.
Fixed places, titleholder access and upgrades are different routes
A fixed place is supplied through the published national allocation rather than through the upgrade evaluation. It is the relevant federation’s allocated route into the competition, although the participating team must still comply with applicable requirements.
An upgrade request is an application for Champions League admission outside that fixed-place route. Filing the request makes the club an applicant. The request becomes a place only when it is approved and the club is included in the confirmed field.
The terms can therefore be separated as follows:
- Registration: Entry of a club into the relevant participation or application process.
- Upgrade request: An application seeking Champions League access beyond a fixed national place.
- Approved upgrade: An upgrade request accepted through the evaluation and approval process.
- Titleholder access: Entry connected to winning another designated EHF competition, as applied to MT Melsungen in this lineup.
- Final admission: Inclusion in the confirmed Champions League field.
MT Melsungen’s route illustrates why those labels matter. Its place followed its victory in the 2025/26 EHF European League Men; it was not granted as an upgrade. Nor does that example establish unconditional European League winner access in every season or circumstance.
The applicable framework states that no federation may have more than three teams in the EHF Champions League and that every participant must meet the minimum requirements. It also provides for two places in the men’s competition to be allocated through wildcards, according to the EHF qualification and upgrade framework.
The reference to two wildcard places does not explain how “wildcards” map onto the broader set of 13 approved men’s upgrades. It would therefore be inaccurate either to call all 13 upgrade recipients wildcards or to assume that only two of them were upgrades. The published material does not provide that classification.
The seven published upgrade-evaluation criteria
Upgrade requests were assessed across seven published categories rather than by a single sporting measure.
| Criterion | Scope |
|---|---|
| Venue | Proposed home venue |
| TV | Television-related considerations |
| Spectators | The club’s spectator dimension |
| Club ranking | Applicable EHF club-ranking measure |
| Media | Media plans and performance |
| Product management | Management of the competition product |
| Highlight event | A planned highlight event at a minimum of one home match |
For 2026/27, the venue, TV and spectator criteria remained unchanged. A new club-ranking category replaced the previous criterion based on results in past EHF competitions. Media and product management became separate categories, while the planned highlight event was introduced as the seventh criterion.
Representatives of the EHF, EHF Marketing and Forum Club Handball evaluated the applications before the proposal went to the EHF Executive Committee for approval. The official upgrade-criteria explanation therefore describes an assessed application process, not a simple next-in-line sporting berth.
The publication of the categories establishes the areas that could be considered. It does not disclose the weight assigned to each category, the scoring method, any club-level score or the decisive factor in an individual decision. Knowing that venue and club ranking formed part of the catalogue, for example, does not prove that either determined the outcome for any particular applicant.
What changes on court—and what remains unanswered
The principal structural change is the expansion of the men’s competition from 16 to 24 teams.
The women’s Champions League remains a 16-team competition with two groups of eight. Its field size and group structure are unchanged, although six of its places for 2026/27 were filled through approved upgrade requests.
The qualification routes produce the following contrast:
- Both competitions begin with 10 fixed-place teams.
- Six approved upgrades complete the women’s 16-team field.
- Thirteen approved upgrades fill most of the additional places in the expanded men’s competition.
- MT Melsungen occupies the remaining men’s place through the separate titleholder route.
The final numbers and club outcomes are public, but several procedural questions remain unresolved. The available material does not explain how the seven criteria were weighted, whether the three-team federation limit or minimum requirements affected a particular application, or how the two stated wildcard places relate to the 13 approved men’s upgrades.
Participants in a Reddit discussion following the announcement questioned the application process and the exclusion of particular clubs. That thread documents anecdotal fan reaction only. It neither proves that the process was unfair nor supplies verified reasons for an individual decision.
The two qualification equations remain the clearest summary:
Women: 10 fixed places + 6 approved upgrades = 16 teams
Men: 10 fixed places + 1 titleholder entrant + 13 approved upgrades = 24 teams
Those routes all lead to the group phase, but they should remain distinct when explaining how the fields were assembled. The totals and application outcomes are clear; any club-specific explanation for an unsuccessful request would remain speculation unless the EHF publishes the relevant scoring or reasons.