League Reconstruction

[Vom Itorium]

What happens if the teams relegated from SPL2 don't fit into the regional set-ups? If it's split into two regions then you'd need a team from the North and a team from the South to finish in the bottom two of SPL2 each season to make it work.

 

Yet another half-arsed attempt at killing the game. Fans are bored shitless of playing the same teams too often in a season, so what do they come up with... a league set-up that will see SPL teams play each other more than they do. Pish.

[Jaggernaut]

Err, isn't this us right back to where we were 15 years ago, when we lost the play-off against the Arabs to drop out of a 10-team top division?

 

Where's the massive reconstruction?

[Vom Itorium]

The BBC report is saying it would need to be an 11-1 vote to get this farce passed. It also says that the Old Firm will be allowed B teams in the regional set-up.

 

For all the think-tanks, McLeish report, brain-storming that these so-called executives of the SPL have done is this really the best shit they can come up with?

[lady-isobel-barnett]

Where have you gone, Ernie Walker

A nation turns it's lonely eyes to you

[alx]

Doncaster was on the radio this morning. He was asked "did you consult with a single football fan". Oh yes he replied we did an online survey!!!!! As I understand it (in PR techniques) this is the opposite of consultation, ie moulding a thing to say what you want.

[twinny]

This is very backwards indeed. There are some good ideas in there, i.e. regional set-up below div 1 and play-off, but the size of the league is mental. Fans appear to be screaming for larger leagues with far less boredom. I know some older fans say that before '75 there were far too many meaningless games, but at least the opposition varied from month to month. I can't possibly believe fans of SPL clubs are feeling entertained and that the structure of its league promotes Scottish football as a whole (well, perhaps some blinkered OF fans who think that Scottish football only includes two clubs).

[McKennan]

Plus ca change ...

[crazy davie]

The problem isn't to do with the size of the league, the problem is to do with the distribution of money. I would estimate that 80% of all revenue (season ticket sales, gate money, merchandising, TV, pies, programmes, etc, etc, etc) generated by Scottish football as a whole ends up in OF coffers. Probably reflects who generates the revenue...

 

BUT - it doesn't matter what you do with numbers of leagues, sizes of leagues, promotion, relegation, splits, breaks, summer football, winter football, whatever - unless we share what wealth there is, we're fckd. We need to somehow get all the money in a pot and share it out. Fairly. It'll take some thinking to work out what "fairly" is, but there's no alternative.

 

The OF HAS to subsidise the rest of Scottish football. The bigger other clubs HAVE to do their share of subsidising as well. We're all in this together.

[uberteeb]

The better option is bigger leagues but at least this is an improvement on the current set up from our point of view. More meaningful games and more chance of promotion. It doesn't help with the monotiny of playing each other 4 times a season but maybe that's too much to ask.

 

From an SPL perspective it is good as it gets rid of the stupid split but surely bigger leagues given the also rans a chance of maybe winning the league playing the OF 4 times a season as opposed to 8?

 

Anyway, who'll be in our regional league?

[PaleGreySky]

I think this is a good idea. The regional lower divisions is a great way to save money for clubs that can't afford senior operations, but are skittering about the lower divisions anyway. Realistically, from the 20th league ranked club downwards, costs would be cut and, I guess, part time football wouldn't seem like such a drastic step or clubs who still want to win those divisions.

 

For us, in the short term it comes down to whether we're

 

a) happier building towards eventually being the 13th ranked scottish team in order to gain a place in a 12 team spl.

 

or happier building towards being ranked 12-14th, with a chance of going up and a few bigger gates in an exciting end of season playoff. First division playoffs similar to those in the 2nd and 3rd would be pretty big games. Thistle-Dundee, or Dunfermline-Falkirk for a chance to go up would draw in crowds of 8,000-10,000 odd. I think this is a big step towards a system similar to the english leagues, and a big step towards an eventual pyramid, which is needed. If it was to replicate the success of the english leagues, hopefully we'd have something akin to an exciting season like those in the championship.

 

I think this is good. I'd take it.

[Pie Of The Month]

What happens if the teams relegated from SPL2 don't fit into the regional set-ups? If it's split into two regions then you'd need a team from the North and a team from the South to finish in the bottom two of SPL2 each season to make it work.

 

Yet another half-arsed attempt at killing the game. Fans are bored shitless of playing the same teams too often in a season, so what do they come up with... a league set-up that will see SPL teams play each other more than they do. Pish.

 

If it's anything like the regional leagues in England then they used to readjust the leagues each year. It sometimes meant those fairly central could be in the Northern regions one year and southern regions the next.

[lady-isobel-barnett]

The SFL wallah (Longmuir) has come out against the regionalisation of the lower leagues. Presumably he thinks it's fun to send Clyde up to Elgin on Boxing Day and Stranraer to Elgin in mid January.

[Uncle Psychosis]

Proposals to satisfy the problems of the SPL and stuff the rest of the teams in Scotland and the fans. The only way things will change is if Rangers or Celtic go through a catastrophic spell and lose half their average home attendance. Only then will they listen to what the fans want.

 

Te OF are killing Scottish football.

 

I honestly don't believe that Rangers and Celtic are the big drivers behind the closed shop stuff. I've long believed that its the Hearts/Hibs/Aberdeens/Dundee Utds of the world that are terrified of change. The OF may get 4 games a season against each other---but Aberdeen get to play *8* games against one or other of the OF.

 

For me, the big thing that *has* to change is the number of teams relegated/promoted. If it were me I'd be really tempted to keep the leagues exactly as they are, but with the bottom 3 getting automatically relegated from the SPL, bottom 2 automatically relegated from the SFL1 and SFL2, and some kind of system to allow relegation at the bottom of SFL3 so that junior teams etc could have a fair crack at the seniors. I think that would make Scottish football much more interesting.

[Lenziejag2]

I honestly don't believe that Rangers and Celtic are the big drivers behind the closed shop stuff. I've long believed that its the Hearts/Hibs/Aberdeens/Dundee Utds of the world that are terrified of change. The OF may get 4 games a season against each other---but Aberdeen get to play *8* games against one or other of the OF.

 

For me, the big thing that *has* to change is the number of teams relegated/promoted. If it were me I'd be really tempted to keep the leagues exactly as they are, but with the bottom 3 getting automatically relegated from the SPL, bottom 2 automatically relegated from the SFL1 and SFL2, and some kind of system to allow relegation at the bottom of SFL3 so that junior teams etc could have a fair crack at the seniors. I think that would make Scottish football much more interesting.

[Lenziejag2]

Did anyone hear Alec Smith - currently Chairman of the Scottish Managers' Association - on Radio Scotland this morning? He advocated precisely the structure which I have always wished to see. Let me say more. You start from the current 42 senior teams in Scotland, add six more from the Juniors/Highland League/East of Scotland League/etc., in order to reach a total of 48 senior teams. From these you construct three leagues of 16, which is the absolute ideal number in any league arrangement. Teams play each other home and away - and the SPL can have a split if they want it, in order to guarantee four OF games per season. Two up, two down throughout. Sectional League Cup in each of the three divisions, so that you have sufficient games for everyone. Add in the Scottish Cup, the League Cup, and the Alba Cup - and hey presto, you have got something which should retain the punters' interest throughout the season!

[Chicofan]

I honestly don't believe that Rangers and Celtic are the big drivers behind the closed shop stuff. I've long believed that its the Hearts/Hibs/Aberdeens/Dundee Utds of the world that are terrified of change. The OF may get 4 games a season against each other---but Aberdeen get to play *8* games against one or other of the OF.

 

For me, the big thing that *has* to change is the number of teams relegated/promoted. If it were me I'd be really tempted to keep the leagues exactly as they are, but with the bottom 3 getting automatically relegated from the SPL, bottom 2 automatically relegated from the SFL1 and SFL2, and some kind of system to allow relegation at the bottom of SFL3 so that junior teams etc could have a fair crack at the seniors. I think that would make Scottish football much more interesting.

 

Thats bang on.....i would say everyone outside the OF are the one;s holding back progress....it doesn't matter to ugly sisters who they play each week....there not going to be involved in any relegation issues...

 

why oh why are they not discussing 16 team leagues

[McKennan]

The OF HAS to subsidise the rest of Scottish football. The bigger other clubs HAVE to do their share of subsidising as well. We're all in this together.

 

 

I've asked this a couple of times on Sportsound's Facebook and haven't had an answer. I'd like to ask you the same question, Davie. That's a confident assertion about the Old Firm subsidising the rest of football.

 

Where is the evidence the Old Firm has sustained clubs outside of the 'top' two leagues of the Scottish game? The answer is there isn't any evidence. Not from teams like Montrose, Queens Park in the modern era, Pollok, East of Scotland sides, the Highland League.

 

This is a very narrow debate.

[crazy davie]

I've asked this a couple of times on Sportsound's Facebook and haven't had an answer. I'd like to ask you the same question, Davie. That's a confident assertion about the Old Firm subsidising the rest of football.

 

Where is the evidence the Old Firm has sustained clubs outside of the 'top' two leagues of the Scottish game? The answer is there isn't any evidence. Not from teams like Montrose, Queens Park in the modern era, Pollok, East of Scotland sides, the Highland League.

 

This is a very narrow debate.

Sorry McKennan, not understanding what you're asking me...

[McKennan]

Why does the Old Firm have to subsidise the rest of Scottish fitba, Davie? In what sense does this need to happen? Are you talking about some kind of financial (for want of a better word) device or instrument that would see the Old Firm handicapped or taxed?

[uberteeb]

Everyone in the SPL wants to keep it as it is.

 

The diddy teams don't want more chance of getting relegated.

 

The larger non-runners want more games at home to the OF for revenue reasons.

 

The OF (and I'm sure other chariman as well) want 4 OF games per season as this is what the TV companies pay the money for, they are the only Scottish fixtures that people outside Scotland are likely to watch, most Sky subscribers live in England.

 

What you would like to think would happen would be the diddy clubs would vote for it because it would mean that when/if they do eventually go down they have a far better chance of bouncing back with more than 1 promotion place. And that the larger non-runners would think that by only playing the OF 4 times and not 8 they have more chance of winning more games and coming 2nd or even 1st in the league. Unfortunately this involves more progressive thinking and an element of risk so why would they take the chance?

 

There really is no incentive for the OF not to keep it the way it is, there is no upside for them. It gives them the most chance of winning the league, it gives them more TV money and it gives them more derby games.

[John Blutarsky]

Thats bang on.....i would say everyone outside the OF are the one;s holding back progress....it doesn't matter to ugly sisters who they play each week....there not going to be involved in any relegation issues...

 

why oh why are they not discussing 16 team leagues

 

don't know about everyone but certainly hibs & hearts - 4 derbies a season plus OF full houses; dundee utd and aberdeen, both of whom get good houses at home vs the OF. smaller teams no longer get full houses vs the OF, as our last sojourn in the spl will attest to and the benefits are increasingly outweighed by incraesed police and stewarding costs.

 

pressure from the satellite broadcasters for the spl to deliver four pantomimes featuring the ugly sisters is probably a significant factor in the 10 teamt setup being pursued.

 

play-offs in 10 team leagues has a novelty value, which might be successful in the short-term but in the end it's still playing even more games a season against the same teams, which has been chasing pay at the gate fans away for years and will continue to do so. the proposal is more flogging a dead horse than a cash cow.

 

here's a crazy idea. play less games whilst living within your means. might give the game time to breathe and develop, make it more competitive and bring back fans in the longer term.

[PaleGreySky]

I think playoff would be good. It's v unlikely we'll ever get 14 or 16 in the spl, as there's no incentive for them to vote for it.

 

Here's a questions: one off playoff final at Hampden? Or two legged at the grounds?

 

I think, if we're not going to get a decent 16 team league, the best we can hope for to make things more interesting is a pyramid system. This has just got to happen, and regional lower divisions is the best step towards this.

[German Jag]

I think playoff would be good. It's v unlikely we'll ever get 14 or 16 in the spl, as there's no incentive for them to vote for it.

 

Here's a questions: one off playoff final at Hampden? Or two legged at the grounds?

I think, if we're not going to get a decent 16 team league, the best we can hope for to make things more interesting is a pyramid system. This has just got to happen, and regional lower divisions is the best step towards this.

 

Would have to be two legged at the grounds. For the combination of teams likely to end up in such a scenario, then Hampden is way too big!

[Steven H]

I think playoff would be good. It's v unlikely we'll ever get 14 or 16 in the spl, as there's no incentive for them to vote for it.

 

Here's a questions: one off playoff final at Hampden? Or two legged at the grounds?

 

I think, if we're not going to get a decent 16 team league, the best we can hope for to make things more interesting is a pyramid system. This has just got to happen, and regional lower divisions is the best step towards this.

 

Here's an interesting one, or not as the case may be, will the voting system change if/when the scenario of SPL 1 and SPL 2 comes to fruition? Maybe the long term goal is to get more Clubs into the 'voting' seats while the current ESPN tv deal expires

 

I've tried, but this is the only silver lining I can find in this dumbass proposal. It's got to be a 16 team league...or at least an increase in the top league not a decrease.

[crazy davie]

Why does the Old Firm have to subsidise the rest of Scottish fitba, Davie? In what sense does this need to happen? Are you talking about some kind of financial (for want of a better word) device or instrument that would see the Old Firm handicapped or taxed?

Football business is different from business business. In business business it is good for you to have weak competition. In football business it is good for you to have strong competition - at least it as far as I can make out.

 

Building strong competition requires money and the OF generate the vast majority of whatever money there is, therefore if we accept that we want strong competition, then the money to pay for it has to be subsidised by the OF. There is no other money.

 

What I was proposing is that ALL revenue generated by ALL clubs is fed into a pot, and money allocated out of that pot in such a way that the strongest possible competition is fostered. I realise that needs a bit more thought, but it is that kind of approach we need, not tinkering around with the status quo.

 

So yes, in effect, the OF would effectively be handicapped or taxed.