lady-isobel-barnett Posted November 19, 2012 Report Share Posted November 19, 2012 For what it's worth the SPL have voted unanimously in favour of this 12/12 8-8-8 thingy Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jaggernaut Posted November 19, 2012 Report Share Posted November 19, 2012 Have I got this right?: the SPL plan is for there to be a split half-way through the season? In other words, teams that get off to a good start will stay in the top section for the rest of the season, while those who didn't start so well but who might well have gone on a great run in the second half will be denied exactly that possibility, because they'll find themselves playing for nothing other than avoiding relegation? If so, it'll be yet another reason for fans to drift away. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
read'n'yell Posted November 19, 2012 Report Share Posted November 19, 2012 Have I got this right?: the SPL plan is for there to be a split half-way through the season? In other words, teams that get off to a good start will stay in the top section for the rest of the season, while those who didn't start so well but who might well have gone on a great run in the second half will be denied exactly that possibility, because they'll find themselves playing for nothing other than avoiding relegation? If so, it'll be yet another reason for fans to drift away. Realistically if your team is bottom four come half way then you won't be competing for Europe so there is nothing else at stake. If they then pick up form then nothing to worry about, will have a new mini league to go on a potentially win. I think its easy to take a quick reaction to this proposal (see my comments from the other day) although the more I think about it the more I think we will be a main beneficiary from this. Low spl clubs and top sfl clubs gain the most. Us, dunfermline, dundee, falkirk, st mirren etc have most to gain by the added competition. We can have half a season playing in the spl and getting good money plus we can have half a season that we have a chance of winning games and not getting gubbed every week. More changes are needed if we want to improve the scottish game as a whole, but on a selfish level we should be biting our hand of at this proposal. Extra fans will turn out to watch this. As a side, I think our decent players would be regularly poached in this new set up as it puts them in the shop window and shows how they can perform against spl teams. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
potty trained Posted November 19, 2012 Report Share Posted November 19, 2012 But more likely. We start in tier 2... We spend half a season aiming for top 4. We get it and spend the second half playing the bottom 4 teams in the SPL. 4 teams with higher budgets, Christ st mirren are paying folk 2k a week!!!. We finish bottom 4 in the mini league and there we are back in SPL2 again the next season. Or conversely we finish fifth after the first half and need to spend the second half of the season playing against the teams below us with nothing to play for. Why would anyone go and watch that? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
twinny Posted November 19, 2012 Report Share Posted November 19, 2012 But more likely. We start in tier 2... We spend half a season aiming for top 4. We get it and spend the second half playing the bottom 4 teams in the SPL. 4 teams with higher budgets, Christ st mirren are paying folk 2k a week!!!. We finish bottom 4 in the mini league and there we are back in SPL2 again the next season. Or conversely we finish fifth after the first half and need to spend the second half of the season playing against the teams below us with nothing to play for. Why would anyone go and watch that? There would be a trophy to play for. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
potty trained Posted November 19, 2012 Report Share Posted November 19, 2012 There would be a trophy to play for. Really? Winner of the tier 3 league (17th best team in Scotland) trophy! Where do we sign? :-) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
distel Posted November 19, 2012 Report Share Posted November 19, 2012 Why don't we just look to another country where the set up seems to work and replicate theirs. Say Germany! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
twinny Posted November 19, 2012 Report Share Posted November 19, 2012 Really? Winner of the tier 3 league (17th best team in Scotland) trophy! Where do we sign? :-) We're currently playing to be the 13th best team in Scotland. Of course we're playing for promotion too, but the title actually means more to me than promotion would Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Norgethistle Posted November 19, 2012 Report Share Posted November 19, 2012 But more likely. We start in tier 2... We spend half a season aiming for top 4. We get it and spend the second half playing the bottom 4 teams in the SPL. 4 teams with higher budgets, Christ st mirren are paying folk 2k a week!!!. We finish bottom 4 in the mini league and there we are back in SPL2 again the next season. Or conversely we finish fifth after the first half and need to spend the second half of the season playing against the teams below us with nothing to play for. Why would anyone go and watch that? A continual Yo-Yo for many teams, yet again the SPL come up with an idea that looks like it was thought up at the end of an LSD come down, more teams will shut up shop, top 8 will play each other 4 times a season (plus cups) with fans already moaning about the repatition, but when did the fans count as long as the old firm can get their 4 games of hate the rest can take what is left 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
G SUS Posted November 19, 2012 Report Share Posted November 19, 2012 Cheers.... How do you suggest the second and third tier generate money from the loss of income they will be up against in your structure? say thistle for example... imagine we arent good enough to get into the top league.... how do you suggest we cover the loss of income that only having 15 home games would bring? Only having 15 home games lowers turn over, therefore lowers budgets... surely playing squad, youth structure, many non playing aspects would take a huge hit... do you forsee many clubs closing down, unable to run as a business or service debt, when they might only have 15 opportunities to generate any income, in one season? Ideally i'd have a cheaper TV deal covering Friday Night Football, realistically i know this would be a no brainer. There is no ideal "strong" second tier, from what i can see. Make it bigger than 16 teams and there will be tonnes of boring mid-table clashes towards the end that mean nothing, no-one will attend. I'd have a 16 team league. Winner up automatically, playoffs 2nd to 5th(I know this contradicts my earlier outline but i've been thinking more about it) and three down. 50% of the teams will have an "impact" and will keep more clubs supporters interested for longer. All the clubs in the second tier would have to cut their cloth accordingly. If they can't afford to stay afloat, then it's a shame but they shouldn't have budgeted outwith their means Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
G SUS Posted November 19, 2012 Report Share Posted November 19, 2012 any TV deal that relies on four OF matches a season can get to f***. years of pandering to the ugly sisters is what's caused the stagnation of Scottish football, and any reconstruction has to address that issue directly and not just be a workaround to get things back how they were in 2010.. The same TV deal that, when reduced, has clubs struggling to pay their wages. If we want to have maximum revenue in Scotland from TV and media there needs to be 4 OF games. That is a fact. what's needed is a league setup of three tiers of 14, playing each other twice a season, 2-up-2-down with playoffs, a pyramid system for Junior progression and a fair distribution of TV monies. if Sky pay less overall to the top tier for tv rights, but it's distributed evenly, it won't affect the income of most of the teams involved So you want less home games, thus reducing the income and making the rich, richer? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
G SUS Posted November 19, 2012 Report Share Posted November 19, 2012 Level 1 - Premier 18 teams, bottom 2 relegated, 3rd bottom into play-off Level 2 - Championship 18 teams, top 2 promoted, 3rd 4th and 5th into play-off, bottom 2 relegated, 3rd bottom into play-off Level 3 - Conference 18 teams, top 2 promoted, 3rd 4th and 5th into play-off, bottom 2 relegated, 3rd and 4th bottom into play-off Level 4 - Conference North/South, 2 divisions of 12/14/16/18 teams, 2 winners promoted, 2nd 3rd and 4th from each division go into play-off with 1 team from conference This is what we should have. We should forget about trying to accommodate everyone and focus on trying to improve the whole game. This is not a quick fix, and neither should it be. If there was a quick fix, I'm sure even the idiots in charge would have found it by now. It could take up to 10 years before we see the results that we are looking for, but I can guarantee that if we end up with some of the suggestions being banded about by the SPL/SFL/SFA, at the end of those 10 years, we will be back here asking the same questions we are now. We should also not be looking at something that we could employ straight away. Give everyone a couple of years notice of any changes, so that they can adjust their budgets to suit the possibility of playing fewer games. 18 teams would be too big IMO. Think of all the meaningless midtable fixtures you're going to get come January. Punters won't turn out for that. Bigger leagues work in bigger countries. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Norgethistle Posted November 19, 2012 Report Share Posted November 19, 2012 The same TV deal that, when reduced, has clubs struggling to pay their wages. If we want to have maximum revenue in Scotland from TV and media there needs to be 4 OF games. That is a fact. Nonsense the teams need to cut their cloth accordingly, where will the TV deal be if the old firm disappear to the EPL/Midatlantic/Legoland league as they keep promising or more likely Rangers mkII hit financial meltdown again Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
G SUS Posted November 19, 2012 Report Share Posted November 19, 2012 Nonsense the teams need to cut their cloth accordingly, where will the TV deal be if the old firm disappear to the EPL/Midatlantic/Legoland league as they keep promising or more likely Rangers mkII hit financial meltdown again Neither of those things will happen in the next 20 years. We're discussing realistic reconstruction. We can't go on "what ifs". I've made a, realistic, assumption that Rangers will be back in the Top 6. They are too strong not to be. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
potty trained Posted November 19, 2012 Report Share Posted November 19, 2012 We can't go on what ifs..... I've made a realistic assumption.... Well, we can go on what ifs, as your assumption, no matter how realistic you perceive it to be is just that, an assumption... A what if, if you will. I don't think that the actual teams like rangers/Celtic/Hibs/hearts should be taken into consideration. It should just be team 1-14 play in this division etc etc... When you start considering one team, you consider another, then another. Lets just get back to bloody basics... 3 leagues of 14. 2 up and 2 down. If the league expands, then it expands from the top down, 16-14-14,,, 16-16-14... If you have 16 in a div then it's two up two down with a single play off match between 3rd bottom and 3rd top. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
danish jag Posted November 19, 2012 Report Share Posted November 19, 2012 Hmm the suggestion that 54 clubs could and should be playing in nationwide leagues is a bit far fetched. I think we should have regionalisation enter below two top divisions of 16/18 teams. A North and a South league consisting of 12 teams each playing home and away. Top 6 of North and South will then join for a further 11 games and likewise with the buttom six. So basically, 2 1/2 nationwide leagues and full regionalisation below that based on the junior structure of North, East and West along with the ******* 'senior' league that is South of Scotland League. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chicofan Posted November 19, 2012 Report Share Posted November 19, 2012 6 a side teams is the future i reckon....indoors as well...get a full house very week...dont need such a big squad of players either..costs will be slashed..fans will be sloshed as they drink beer indoors at the Scottish Indoor Fitba league Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
twinny Posted November 19, 2012 Report Share Posted November 19, 2012 42 teams. Play each team twice. Top eight from the north/east and top eight from west/south go into play offs for the Championship. 12 Glasgow derbies, a million Fife derbies. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
potty trained Posted November 19, 2012 Report Share Posted November 19, 2012 Where's sige sige? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
G SUS Posted November 19, 2012 Report Share Posted November 19, 2012 Where's sige sige? Banned. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Blackpool Jags Posted November 19, 2012 Report Share Posted November 19, 2012 I accept that I'm no more than an old nostalgic, but give me the two divisions of 18, with a simple 34 games per team per season. Add to that two automatic promotions from the second tier (and two relegated, of course), plus a play off between 3rd top and 3rd bottom for the third promotion / relegation spot. Simples. Maybe supplement that with a form of pyramid resulting in promotion to and relegation from the second tier. Ultimately, though, we'd have to reduce the overall number of teams from the present ridiculous 42 teams to 38. Furthermore, we have to bite the bullet and accept that the '4 OF league games a season' (if / when sevco make it back to base camp) malarkey must be consigned to the dustbin. If the resultant loss of Sky money means one or two casualties, then we'll simply get to the desired 38 team set-up that bit sooner. The restoration of variety in the fixtures would see the return of at least some of the fans lost to the game since the OF became the chattels of Sky and the rest of Scottish football a tedious sideshow. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
G SUS Posted November 19, 2012 Report Share Posted November 19, 2012 We can't go on what ifs..... I've made a realistic assumption.... Well, we can go on what ifs, as your assumption, no matter how realistic you perceive it to be is just that, an assumption... A what if, if you will. I don't think that the actual teams like rangers/Celtic/Hibs/hearts should be taken into consideration. It should just be team 1-14 play in this division etc etc... When you start considering one team, you consider another, then another. Lets just get back to bloody basics... 3 leagues of 14. 2 up and 2 down. If the league expands, then it expands from the top down, 16-14-14,,, 16-16-14... If you have 16 in a div then it's two up two down with a single play off match between 3rd bottom and 3rd top. The only thing that affects a TV deal, for the good, is 4 OF games. That's why my format suits the TV deals(whether you like it or not). It allows teams to have the safety of at least 18 home games(same as SFl1, more than SPL). It'll never be implemented. It's too sensible. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mediocre Pundit Posted November 19, 2012 Report Share Posted November 19, 2012 Two leagues of 16, play each other twice. Whack a group stage at the start of the League Cup to give teams some more games (localise it too) to give all teams a few extra games to mitigate the loss of three home league games. 2 down, 2 up, playoffs for third bottom, third, fourth and fifth - with a one-legged final at a suitable neutral venue. Simple as ****. Below that you can have North and Central leagues - whatever setup you want, winner of both gets promoted and the two bottom teams in the First Division get relegated. Again, simple as ****. Stop all this complicated bullshit. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
G SUS Posted November 19, 2012 Report Share Posted November 19, 2012 Whack a group stage at the start of the League Cup to give teams some more games (localise it too) to give all teams a few extra games to mitigate the loss of three home league games. No. No. No. There was a reason why the League Cup groups were ditched. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lenziejag Posted November 20, 2012 Report Share Posted November 20, 2012 Why were the League cup groups ditched ? Was it because the attendances weren't good ? Well if that was the reason, the alternative hasn't worked - so we may as well ditch all the cups too. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.