Jump to content

No Regional Leagues, No Pyramid Structure


yoda-jag
 Share

Recommended Posts

According to this (it is written by that muppet Jim Spence admittedly), the SPL and SFL bigwigs met the 30 SFL clubs yesterday to discuss regional leagues below the uninspiring revamped top 2 leagues proposal, to seek their views on regionalising the SFL leagues below, and introducing a pyramid structure, allowing for relegation from and promotion to the SFL.

 

Seems that none of the SFL clubs are in favour of regionalised leagues, and they even seem to be able to read the minds of clubs outwith the SFL (Highland, EoS, Juniors) as they say they are "not sure there is any appetite for the pyramid system from the clubs outside the SFL", despite no representatives from such associations being asked or invited to contribute to the discussions.

 

Add in the mindboggling genius idea of swapping the Top 2 of 12/10 for 10/12, and it is clear Scottish Football is run by numpties.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Scotland is too small. No to regional leagues. No I say.

That's ridiculous. It's not the size of the country that matters in any case it's the state of the infrastructure.

I do tho' feel that with larger leagues, where those crazy trips are reduced to one a season, that regionalisation of the lower leagues would be less of an issue.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The SPL should be abolished. The structure should be;

 

SFL Division One (16 teams, 37 games) two teams are relegated

SFL Division Two (16 teams, 37 games) two teams are promoted and relegated

SFL Division Three (16 teams, 37 games) two teams are promoted, the bottom team is relegated to the Scottish Conference (like the English Conference), and the 2nd bottom team and 2nd team of the Scottish Conference have play-off.

The Shetland Football Association should be allowed into the pyramid structure, if they become a club.

 

How can we have 37 games in the 16-team league? Firstly, two teams meet two times home/away. The winner of the home/away games have the right to host the 3rd game.

 

By the way, there are "Celtic FC" and "Spurs FC" in the Shetlands. Why do Glasgow's Celtic and London's Spurs make complaints?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Cove Rangers should be allowed into the SFL, to become Aberdeen's rivals.

Edinburgh City should also be allowed into the SFL, to become rivals of Hearts and Hibs.

Shetland Football Association should become Shetland F.C. and be allowed into the SFL.

 

We could come up with the perfect solution but it wouldn't matter. Nobody up there is listening to us. We're only fans. We all know what is wagging this particular dog. 2 self obsessed diseased fleas and big blood filled bug called Sky Sports. The dog itself is old and tired and starving slowly to death. The fleas can't find another dog to land on.

 

Jings. Pushing it a bit there wasn't I? hehehe.

Edited by beep0608
Link to comment
Share on other sites

That's ridiculous. It's not the size of the country that matters in any case it's the state of the infrastructure.

I do tho' feel that with larger leagues, where those crazy trips are reduced to one a season, that regionalisation of the lower leagues would be less of an issue.

 

Spot on.

 

 

Plus, regionalised lower leagues (2 of 10 or 12) would also lead, in my humble opinion, to an increase in crowds (more games against rivals, closer to home than opposite ends of country), and with only one home and one away game against opposing teams, no choosing which home and/or away games to choose out of two - so travelling and home supports would rise too. Maybe not on massive levels for some clubs, but would think most clubs in two regionalised leagues would see rises as opposed to falls in attendances.

 

Similarily in two top leagues of 16 (or even 18), the one home one away scenario would also see majority of teams having rises in average attendances, some quite significantly.

 

Add in mini-leagues where they are drawn from regionalised areas of 4, in groups of 4 or 5 teams, home and away = 6 or 8 games to make up any shortfall in league games in top 2 leagues.

 

More fans coming back, rises to attendances = increased income for clubs = easier to address rising debts of clubs across the country, and reduce the perilious state of many of our clubs, possibly even leading the better playing budgets for some = potential for clubs to raise their player standard, clubs become more competative (at home and in Europe) = standards rise = even more people come to games = opportunity to get higher sponsorship, tv+sky contract values could go up once financial stability and growth returns to country in few years, spread the tv and sponsorship income more equally around the clubs, and it's a longterm win win situation all round for all clubs and scottish game in general.

 

Go ahead with the 10/12 swap, really can't see the game or standards improving as much or attracting as many to the games in a few seasons time.

 

Just an opinion.

Edited by yoda-jag
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...