League reconstruction: Let's hear your view

[ftk]

Are there actually any discussions happening this off season between league chiefs to discuss if any further change should be made to the structure of the leagues? I've not seen anything about it in the news since January or something.

Pretty sure when the new tv deal starts in a few years a new league format will be put to the vote. From what I hear it will be a 12-12-18 league with top 2 league's splitting into 8-8-8. Also summer football will be voted on. BT will have exclusive rights to the top 24 teams fixtures showing games mainly on fri/sat/Sun nights(745pm ko). Odd lunchtime ko for high risk games like old firm. Club's will be put under extra pressure to vote this through as BT will offer the biggest ever t.v. deal for scottish football. (Around 30 million a season)

[Murgie McDubh]

*I started off writing this in the form of article before I found this thread so it might feel a bit like I haven't read any of the previous posts but I can't be arsed editing this. All my points are contained but there's probably waffle so by all means skim through till I get to my point.

Hello, first time poster and having read others' ideas for restructuring Scottish football, I thought I would offer my own thoughts on revitalising our game. They are fanciful, idealist and no doubt dripping in as much ignorance as a piece written from the perspective of one person can be and I offer no evidence but my own heart and logic to back them up.

I want to highlight what I believe to be the problem before detailing my solution. People will point to a lack of quality but I think that is a relative issue. Arguably 10 years ago the player quality was higher but the decline hasn't been noticeable because we've all declined more or less at the same rate. It's my opinion but if you pit a sub-standard winger against a competent full back then the winger looks sub-standard it if you pit a sub-standard winger against a sub-standard full back they both look competent so quality is only noticeable when you're playing superior/inferior opposition. I've often laughed at English football fans where they use the EFL scale to measure the quality of other teams, They're league 1, they're championship, they're league 2 at best. No they're not. They're SPFL standard. There is no point our clubs trying to put together a team that can live in their league 1/championship when it's the Scottish premiership they play in. Players from up here go down there and do well but others don't but then players from down there come up here and do well but others don't. There's one way to judge quality and that is a competitive match, that's why we have European football and since championship teams aren't invited to that party there's no point comparing our football to them.

For me football is all about the story and right now the story is Celtic through superior resources and tactical competition management, will win the league and likely both cups, that is the story for the foreseeable future and that is the problem with our game. If I was to ask those with the authority to say, whether Celtic will win every league title from now until the death of football and they say, no! hopefully Rangers are able to reach a level where they can put in a credible challenge, then I am done with Scottish football. I would say to my club find another tournament to play in or lose me as a supporter. I'm not masochist. I won't support such a one sided competition much longer if there's not a genuine strategy put place to try and address it.

It has been said we shouldn't compare ourselves to the English game and that's true. I don't watch it. I think it's an abomination but one thing it has/had is the story. Rises and falls, periods of dominance. Liverpool in 80s, Manchester United under Alex and the clubs that stood up to them. For one decade we had that. Aberdeen, Dundee United, Hearts' near miss and then David Murray came and ruined things. That's what I believe we should try to aspire to return to and even if that's not realistic I believe the gap could be closed significantly enough for a club outside the old firm to build a team to provide a credible challenge.

There is a lot of spin from sections of the media when they try to talk up our game, they'll talk about attendances and how if you divide the number of clubs by two you'll our league is no more unvaried then what you see across Europe. Those people I believe are deliberately overlooking the subtle differences of other leagues. Take the Dutch league, they have 3 clubs bigger than anything we have in Scotland and it's not a surprise to see these teams occupy the top 3 positions of their league but it's also not a surprise to see other teams split them up and that is the subtle difference. Their big 3 dominate but they aren't untouchable. PSV, Ajax and Feyenoord have all finished below the top 3 in the last 20 years and will all likely finish below the top 3 within the next 20. There is belief in the Netherlands that the smaller provincial club can rise to be the best team in the country and it's been proven by AZ and Twente in recent years. We don't have that belief in our game. Celtic are in position of such control they are suffocating the competition. When I think of Scottish football I visualise a fat chieftain (I used to think of 2 but those days have changed) lying on a large shield being carried by malnourished slaves standing on quicksand. We're sinking but we're all sinking at the same rate and if we want to save Scottish football we have to do something about the fat fucker on top.

My belief is narrowing the gap between Celtic and the rest of the competition will raise the prestige of our game. A more prestigious game attracts a better quality of player whether that's foreign imports or keeping the talent we're producing and the game gets stronger. So for the solution.

Structure

Starting with the top league, expand to 16 teams with 30 games a season. This 16 team league will be closed. No relegation or promotion.

This is going to be a difficult sell but bare with me. There's a train of thought that states Scotland has too many clubs. I don't think that's the case but I do think we have too many clubs competing for the same slice of pie. In this system I'm trying to promote the idea of a single club being giving the task of representing football in their area, discarding the local rivalry and allowing bigger rivalries to form. I know I'm not selling it yet but hing on. Closing the league is my attempt at protecting the strength of the competition. The goal is to provide as many clubs as possible the means to grow and close the gap on Celtic. 16 teams provides variety, it also means every area of Scotland capable of supporting a decent sized football club can be represented and having a handful of teams competing for the same fan base doesn't help. It's not my intention to obliterate the local team. You can't make Raith Rovers fans support Dunfermline instead but could you not have it so they would support them as well as? I want to create a system where communities have their "capital" team as well as their local team. People are capable of having their wee team and supporting one of the cheeks so passionate fifers may be able to support two teams as well.

Relegation promotes a negative mindset. I don't think it adds anything to the sport. You can't reach your potential when you're mindset is to avoid being the worst rather than aspiring to be the best. Teams under threat from relegation tend to adopt a negative style of play to avoid it. Any progress a club has made is lost if they're relegated. The system works in big countries. The contrasting word promotion balances the negativity  in large countries but they have whole communities with big clubs looking to work there way to the top of the ladder. We don't have that in Scotland. We can just about scrape together a league of 16 and with switching to a 16 team will likely initially a drop in resources per club but closing the league will at least provide stability for the clubs and from there we can grow the game.

A 30 game season playing each team twice would be a breath of fresh air to football fans. 
It also serves as one part of the puzzle to bridge the competition gap. The format we have in place is the worst I've seen for handing the advantage to the club with the greatest resources. To win the league you have to play the club with the best resources 4 times which is worth up to 11% of the possible points whereas the head to heads in a 30 game season are worth 6% of the total points. Power also shifts away from the club with the big squad, we've all heard the phrase "it's a long season" well a 30 game tournament isn't quite so long and lessens the advantage of having a big squad a little. And to those foaming from the mouth suggesting I'm trying cheapen the league by making it easier for the wee club, how about looking at it from the point of view that I'm trying to improve it by making it harder for the big club? The league champions should've shown ability, tactical discipline, determination and being able to perform under pressure. Right now they can get by on ability alone. There are never any questions over Celtic's bottle, it's never tested. The phrase, "you can only beat what's in front of you" was invented in Scotland. The media in Scotland perversely bestow praise on the qualities that Celtic haven't had to show because it would appear churlish not to. The current set up Celtic favours Celtic so much we know they will win 10 in row. It's not question of if, it's not even a question of when.

Replacing the league cup

This tournament I'm proposing was fun to think about and it may be pie in the sky but I genuinely believe it could work and be worthwhile for all involved. It is also crucial to making a league without relegation work. The league cup in every country lacks prestige but in our game there's very little of that as it is. For small nations like ourselves transnational tournaments are the way to go. In Scotland European football is everything. The crowds come out for these matches and it doesn't matter how prestigious the team is, it's a chance for Scottish football to prove its worth.

The tournament would be contested by teams from ourselves, Norway, Sweden and Denmark.

* The top 8 league finishers of each nation qualify for the first round of the tournament. In Scotland those who don't make the cut play in the Scottish league cup.
* In the event a club has qualified for group stage European football they get a bye into the next round and the next highest league finish from that league takes its place in the first round.
* The first round consists of 8 groups of 4 with a club from each FA represented. Each club in the group plays each other home and away.
* The winners of each group earns themselves a home tie for the third round.
* Depending on the number of teams qualifying for group stage football, they will be drawn against the corresponding number of worst scoring second place finishers over 2 legs for a place in the third round. In the event there are more than eight European qualifiers then the worst scoring 2nd place finishers are eliminated until there are 16 teams to be drawn against each other for a place in the third round. Away goal will play no part and will go to extra time and penalties if required.
* In the third round is a winner takes all match played at the home ground of the group winners. The game will go into extra time and penalties if required.
* Both the the quarter finals and semi finals will be 2 legged and will go to extra time and penalties if required.
* The final will be played at a suitable venue decided in advance.

First thing I'll say is I believe a tournament like this would capture the imagination of supporters. It's a chance for our clubs to get out of Scottish football and breathe. A tournament featuring the best clubs from four nations has got to be more worthwhile winning than a tournament of one nation. The media would take to it, writing articles commenting on the success or failure of our game depending on how many of our clubs are able to top their groups. 

Second I believe this answers a few questions you may have had when reading about the structure of the league setup. If you think playing the same 15 teams every season may get boring then I believe this tournament will compensate for variation and If you thought clubs may get complacent with the safety of a league with no relegation then I believe this could be the incentive to ensure a competitive team is put out. Knowing that top half finish will get you in this tournament should be enough to convince clubs to push as hard as they can but also knowing that 9th, 10th etc may also get you in depending on how well our clubs do in Europe.

Third a tournament like this could help clubs from all four countries with their European ambitions. At present if a team qualifies for group stage European football, they are at a disadvantage domestically as they have to play 6 more games. For clubs out with the cheeks, we don't have the squad size to cope and will consequently struggle in the league. This tournament serves as preparation for European football. 

Fourth scheduling may well be tricky although as we're losing 8 games from our domestic league there must be Saturdays free. I concede it won't be a tournament for away supporters but your home crowds will I'm sure make up for it and there will be a demand for televised matches which brings us to the champions league problem and their grip on the midweek slot. Ideally we'd challenging and winning back the right to broadcast on champions league days.

Youth system

The system we have is in my opinion ridiculously inefficient. Each youth team produces maybe a couple of players that could play first football a season but more often than not they don't get near a bench let alone on the pitch. For a player to get their first taste of football lightning has to strike. How does young player get in the team when already experience and in most cases physique is against them? He needs to have qualities the manager is desperate for. Say my team Aberdeen has a young penalty box striker with a knack for being at the right place at the right and real potential if he could work on some areas of his game but at the moment that sort of player doesn't suit our game and what we need is a tall player to hold the ball up. Hearts have such a player on their books but what their really after is a penalty box striker. That example doesn't really convey the subtle qualities different players have but it does highlight the inefficiency of our current youth system and seeing as we are a small nation we could possibly get away with something more innovative that larger nations couldn't pull off.

First step in reforming our youth system is to take power away from the clubs. Take the responsibility of of having a youth team away and set up SFA run academies in their place. To fund the system each of the 16 pays a share proportional to their playing budget - league titles are precious if you want to buy them you have to put back into the game. This where the teams who didn't make the 16 come in things, they play in a 20 team league. When players are ready to handle the physicality of the men's game, they are found a club within the 20 that will suit their qualities and give them best chance for further development. The SFA not the club will own the players registration and pay the players wages. If one of the 16 decide they want to sign a player then in the transfer window they can offer the player a contract which will be worth at least the basic wage of a squad player to ensure that clubs don't attempt to hoard kids on cheap contracts. It gives the player freedom to learn the game and develop as a player and then being able sign for a club when he's ready to play for that club. The clubs would be in a position to recruit talent they need to improve rather than develop talent they don't want to risk playing.

Concentrating our resources into academies where the best talent we have can feed off each other and develop under the best coaches and facilities we can provide and then be thrust into a competitive men's game as early as possible where they have to learn the demands of playing in front of a crowd is perhaps an idea born from a lack of knowledge of what it takes to produce footballers but my heart tells me it's an efficient way to run a youth system and would work in small countries like ours.

Keeping talent in Scotland

I can't be the only one frustrated when I see kids who were lucky enough to break through to first team football, spin the roulette wheel again and hope for another double zero at a championship club. Mind you our clubs don't help matters when they sell on their talent for a paltry couple of hundred thousand and in doing so costs them league position (a couple of hundred thousand) and they've had to sack their manager for fear of relegation (a couple of hundred thousand) so If they've broken even, all they've managed to show for it is a season of misery for the supporters.

This 16 league won't work unless the clubs understand the concepts of pride and ambition. Clubs however are hampered by financial constraints we need incentive for staying in Scotland and this where the SFA could help reverse the exodus of talent. Similar to what the Australian and New Zealand RFUs do, they enforce a policy for selecting players for the national team. The way I see this policy looking is only those who play top league football or those who have a significant amount of caps already are eligible to play for the national team. Right now the English championship looks a necessary risk for a young player looking to improve their game it has all the carrots of prestige, money and international recognition. The English championship does not produce international quality players as we are all too aware. They may have players that could be considered better than what we have here but in my opinion not by much and I can't say I wouldn't prefer to see players playing in our league fighting for Scottish footballs reputation. Taking back one carrot for Scottish would help convince players to stay here, hopefully work their way into the national team which will help them get notice from a good team.
 
Teams to play in the 16

Below are the teams I believe should play in a 16 team closed league. I'm also proposing two merged teams. I won't offer any justification for the teams I think should be as I feel I've spouted enough ignorance so I'll concentrate my efforts on upsetting the supporters of 4 clubs.

Aberdeen
Celtic
Dunfermline 
Team from Dundee
Falkirk 
Hibernian 
Hearts
Team based in Inverness 
Kilmarnock
Livingston
Motherwell
Partick Thistle
Queen of the south
The Rangers 
St Johnstone
St Mirren

Merging teams

Dundee and Dundee United

I'm going to provide my own fanciful idea on what a merged Dundee team would look like but whether my vision is palatable to either set of supporters, I don't believe an idea of one team Dundee is unsellable but It can't come from the suits, it has to be the fans who want it and push it through. I see the potential for something unique to football being born. Imagine two sets of fans supporting one team. A club with 2 identities, 2 colours, a Harvey two face of a team if you follow the batman metaphor. They wouldn't have a home or away kit, they'd have two kits, playing half their home games in dark blue and half in tangerine and always forcing the away team to play their away kit. If the merge is successful then the rivalry with Aberdeen intensifies. 2 single team cities in close proximity to each other, I'm confident it would galvanise both clubs.

Inverness Caledonian Thistle and Ross County

One team representing football in the highlands to conform with my philosophy. ICT had the misfortune of being formed a decade or 2 too late. If they were formed in the 70s or 80s when Scottish football believed in itself then I believe they'd look a lot stronger. As it is the project hasn't worked out and Ross County are the bigger club. I don't believe you can pick one or the other. This is more of a rebranding of ICT I'm proposing rather than a merge. Ross county if I had my way with restructuring would play in the 20 team league but I think for supporters of Ross county to back a team from Inverness to represent them in the 16 then some admission has to be made that they were bigger than ICT.

Finally

I'd like end with one final musing. One final glimmer of hope if we can't change things for the better in Scottish football is the proposed European league. The brain child of Barcelona and Real Madrid. Two clubs who looked at what the Old Firm did to Scottish football and thought there's a good idea, let's take this back to Spain! They have come up with an idea to take everything that's evil and wrong with modern football and stick them in a closed 20 team league. Fantastic! Shove them in a corner somewhere so the rest of us can concentrate on a competitive European cup. It would be fascinating to see 20 teams built on the foundations of a glory hunting support take part in a competition where only one of them can win. I mean I wouldn't watch a minute of it but I'd certainly keep an eye out for which clubs are finishing in the bottom half of that league with their egos well and truly deflated.

[ftk]

*I started off writing this in the form of article before I found this thread so it might feel a bit like I haven't read any of the previous posts but I can't be arsed editing this. All my points are contained but there's probably waffle so by all means skim through till I get to my point.
Hello, first time poster and having read others' ideas for restructuring Scottish football, I thought I would offer my own thoughts on revitalising our game. They are fanciful, idealist and no doubt dripping in as much ignorance as a piece written from the perspective of one person can be and I offer no evidence but my own heart and logic to back them up.
I want to highlight what I believe to be the problem before detailing my solution. People will point to a lack of quality but I think that is a relative issue. Arguably 10 years ago the player quality was higher but the decline hasn't been noticeable because we've all declined more or less at the same rate. It's my opinion but if you pit a sub-standard winger against a competent full back then the winger looks sub-standard it if you pit a sub-standard winger against a sub-standard full back they both look competent so quality is only noticeable when you're playing superior/inferior opposition. I've often laughed at English football fans where they use the EFL scale to measure the quality of other teams, They're league 1, they're championship, they're league 2 at best. No they're not. They're SPFL standard. There is no point our clubs trying to put together a team that can live in their league 1/championship when it's the Scottish premiership they play in. Players from up here go down there and do well but others don't but then players from down there come up here and do well but others don't. There's one way to judge quality and that is a competitive match, that's why we have European football and since championship teams aren't invited to that party there's no point comparing our football to them.
For me football is all about the story and right now the story is Celtic through superior resources and tactical competition management, will win the league and likely both cups, that is the story for the foreseeable future and that is the problem with our game. If I was to ask those with the authority to say, whether Celtic will win every league title from now until the death of football and they say, no! hopefully Rangers are able to reach a level where they can put in a credible challenge, then I am done with Scottish football. I would say to my club find another tournament to play in or lose me as a supporter. I'm not masochist. I won't support such a one sided competition much longer if there's not a genuine strategy put place to try and address it.
It has been said we shouldn't compare ourselves to the English game and that's true. I don't watch it. I think it's an abomination but one thing it has/had is the story. Rises and falls, periods of dominance. Liverpool in 80s, Manchester United under Alex and the clubs that stood up to them. For one decade we had that. Aberdeen, Dundee United, Hearts' near miss and then David Murray came and ruined things. That's what I believe we should try to aspire to return to and even if that's not realistic I believe the gap could be closed significantly enough for a club outside the old firm to build a team to provide a credible challenge.
There is a lot of spin from sections of the media when they try to talk up our game, they'll talk about attendances and how if you divide the number of clubs by two you'll our league is no more unvaried then what you see across Europe. Those people I believe are deliberately overlooking the subtle differences of other leagues. Take the Dutch league, they have 3 clubs bigger than anything we have in Scotland and it's not a surprise to see these teams occupy the top 3 positions of their league but it's also not a surprise to see other teams split them up and that is the subtle difference. Their big 3 dominate but they aren't untouchable. PSV, Ajax and Feyenoord have all finished below the top 3 in the last 20 years and will all likely finish below the top 3 within the next 20. There is belief in the Netherlands that the smaller provincial club can rise to be the best team in the country and it's been proven by AZ and Twente in recent years. We don't have that belief in our game. Celtic are in position of such control they are suffocating the competition. When I think of Scottish football I visualise a fat chieftain (I used to think of 2 but those days have changed) lying on a large shield being carried by malnourished slaves standing on quicksand. We're sinking but we're all sinking at the same rate and if we want to save Scottish football we have to do something about the fat fucker on top.
My belief is narrowing the gap between Celtic and the rest of the competition will raise the prestige of our game. A more prestigious game attracts a better quality of player whether that's foreign imports or keeping the talent we're producing and the game gets stronger. So for the solution.
Structure
Starting with the top league, expand to 16 teams with 30 games a season. This 16 team league will be closed. No relegation or promotion.
This is going to be a difficult sell but bare with me. There's a train of thought that states Scotland has too many clubs. I don't think that's the case but I do think we have too many clubs competing for the same slice of pie. In this system I'm trying to promote the idea of a single club being giving the task of representing football in their area, discarding the local rivalry and allowing bigger rivalries to form. I know I'm not selling it yet but hing on. Closing the league is my attempt at protecting the strength of the competition. The goal is to provide as many clubs as possible the means to grow and close the gap on Celtic. 16 teams provides variety, it also means every area of Scotland capable of supporting a decent sized football club can be represented and having a handful of teams competing for the same fan base doesn't help. It's not my intention to obliterate the local team. You can't make Raith Rovers fans support Dunfermline instead but could you not have it so they would support them as well as? I want to create a system where communities have their "capital" team as well as their local team. People are capable of having their wee team and supporting one of the cheeks so passionate fifers may be able to support two teams as well.
Relegation promotes a negative mindset. I don't think it adds anything to the sport. You can't reach your potential when you're mindset is to avoid being the worst rather than aspiring to be the best. Teams under threat from relegation tend to adopt a negative style of play to avoid it. Any progress a club has made is lost if they're relegated. The system works in big countries. The contrasting word promotion balances the negativity  in large countries but they have whole communities with big clubs looking to work there way to the top of the ladder. We don't have that in Scotland. We can just about scrape together a league of 16 and with switching to a 16 team will likely initially a drop in resources per club but closing the league will at least provide stability for the clubs and from there we can grow the game.
A 30 game season playing each team twice would be a breath of fresh air to football fans. 
It also serves as one part of the puzzle to bridge the competition gap. The format we have in place is the worst I've seen for handing the advantage to the club with the greatest resources. To win the league you have to play the club with the best resources 4 times which is worth up to 11% of the possible points whereas the head to heads in a 30 game season are worth 6% of the total points. Power also shifts away from the club with the big squad, we've all heard the phrase "it's a long season" well a 30 game tournament isn't quite so long and lessens the advantage of having a big squad a little. And to those foaming from the mouth suggesting I'm trying cheapen the league by making it easier for the wee club, how about looking at it from the point of view that I'm trying to improve it by making it harder for the big club? The league champions should've shown ability, tactical discipline, determination and being able to perform under pressure. Right now they can get by on ability alone. There are never any questions over Celtic's bottle, it's never tested. The phrase, "you can only beat what's in front of you" was invented in Scotland. The media in Scotland perversely bestow praise on the qualities that Celtic haven't had to show because it would appear churlish not to. The current set up Celtic favours Celtic so much we know they will win 10 in row. It's not question of if, it's not even a question of when.
Replacing the league cup
This tournament I'm proposing was fun to think about and it may be pie in the sky but I genuinely believe it could work and be worthwhile for all involved. It is also crucial to making a league without relegation work. The league cup in every country lacks prestige but in our game there's very little of that as it is. For small nations like ourselves transnational tournaments are the way to go. In Scotland European football is everything. The crowds come out for these matches and it doesn't matter how prestigious the team is, it's a chance for Scottish football to prove its worth.
The tournament would be contested by teams from ourselves, Norway, Sweden and Denmark.
* The top 8 league finishers of each nation qualify for the first round of the tournament. In Scotland those who don't make the cut play in the Scottish league cup.
* In the event a club has qualified for group stage European football they get a bye into the next round and the next highest league finish from that league takes its place in the first round.
* The first round consists of 8 groups of 4 with a club from each FA represented. Each club in the group plays each other home and away.
* The winners of each group earns themselves a home tie for the third round.
* Depending on the number of teams qualifying for group stage football, they will be drawn against the corresponding number of worst scoring second place finishers over 2 legs for a place in the third round. In the event there are more than eight European qualifiers then the worst scoring 2nd place finishers are eliminated until there are 16 teams to be drawn against each other for a place in the third round. Away goal will play no part and will go to extra time and penalties if required.
* In the third round is a winner takes all match played at the home ground of the group winners. The game will go into extra time and penalties if required.
* Both the the quarter finals and semi finals will be 2 legged and will go to extra time and penalties if required.
* The final will be played at a suitable venue decided in advance.
First thing I'll say is I believe a tournament like this would capture the imagination of supporters. It's a chance for our clubs to get out of Scottish football and breathe. A tournament featuring the best clubs from four nations has got to be more worthwhile winning than a tournament of one nation. The media would take to it, writing articles commenting on the success or failure of our game depending on how many of our clubs are able to top their groups. 
Second I believe this answers a few questions you may have had when reading about the structure of the league setup. If you think playing the same 15 teams every season may get boring then I believe this tournament will compensate for variation and If you thought clubs may get complacent with the safety of a league with no relegation then I believe this could be the incentive to ensure a competitive team is put out. Knowing that top half finish will get you in this tournament should be enough to convince clubs to push as hard as they can but also knowing that 9th, 10th etc may also get you in depending on how well our clubs do in Europe.
Third a tournament like this could help clubs from all four countries with their European ambitions. At present if a team qualifies for group stage European football, they are at a disadvantage domestically as they have to play 6 more games. For clubs out with the cheeks, we don't have the squad size to cope and will consequently struggle in the league. This tournament serves as preparation for European football. 
Fourth scheduling may well be tricky although as we're losing 8 games from our domestic league there must be Saturdays free. I concede it won't be a tournament for away supporters but your home crowds will I'm sure make up for it and there will be a demand for televised matches which brings us to the champions league problem and their grip on the midweek slot. Ideally we'd challenging and winning back the right to broadcast on champions league days.
Youth system
The system we have is in my opinion ridiculously inefficient. Each youth team produces maybe a couple of players that could play first football a season but more often than not they don't get near a bench let alone on the pitch. For a player to get their first taste of football lightning has to strike. How does young player get in the team when already experience and in most cases physique is against them? He needs to have qualities the manager is desperate for. Say my team Aberdeen has a young penalty box striker with a knack for being at the right place at the right and real potential if he could work on some areas of his game but at the moment that sort of player doesn't suit our game and what we need is a tall player to hold the ball up. Hearts have such a player on their books but what their really after is a penalty box striker. That example doesn't really convey the subtle qualities different players have but it does highlight the inefficiency of our current youth system and seeing as we are a small nation we could possibly get away with something more innovative that larger nations couldn't pull off.
First step in reforming our youth system is to take power away from the clubs. Take the responsibility of of having a youth team away and set up SFA run academies in their place. To fund the system each of the 16 pays a share proportional to their playing budget - league titles are precious if you want to buy them you have to put back into the game. This where the teams who didn't make the 16 come in things, they play in a 20 team league. When players are ready to handle the physicality of the men's game, they are found a club within the 20 that will suit their qualities and give them best chance for further development. The SFA not the club will own the players registration and pay the players wages. If one of the 16 decide they want to sign a player then in the transfer window they can offer the player a contract which will be worth at least the basic wage of a squad player to ensure that clubs don't attempt to hoard kids on cheap contracts. It gives the player freedom to learn the game and develop as a player and then being able sign for a club when he's ready to play for that club. The clubs would be in a position to recruit talent they need to improve rather than develop talent they don't want to risk playing.
Concentrating our resources into academies where the best talent we have can feed off each other and develop under the best coaches and facilities we can provide and then be thrust into a competitive men's game as early as possible where they have to learn the demands of playing in front of a crowd is perhaps an idea born from a lack of knowledge of what it takes to produce footballers but my heart tells me it's an efficient way to run a youth system and would work in small countries like ours.
Keeping talent in Scotland
I can't be the only one frustrated when I see kids who were lucky enough to break through to first team football, spin the roulette wheel again and hope for another double zero at a championship club. Mind you our clubs don't help matters when they sell on their talent for a paltry couple of hundred thousand and in doing so costs them league position (a couple of hundred thousand) and they've had to sack their manager for fear of relegation (a couple of hundred thousand) so If they've broken even, all they've managed to show for it is a season of misery for the supporters.
This 16 league won't work unless the clubs understand the concepts of pride and ambition. Clubs however are hampered by financial constraints we need incentive for staying in Scotland and this where the SFA could help reverse the exodus of talent. Similar to what the Australian and New Zealand RFUs do, they enforce a policy for selecting players for the national team. The way I see this policy looking is only those who play top league football or those who have a significant amount of caps already are eligible to play for the national team. Right now the English championship looks a necessary risk for a young player looking to improve their game it has all the carrots of prestige, money and international recognition. The English championship does not produce international quality players as we are all too aware. They may have players that could be considered better than what we have here but in my opinion not by much and I can't say I wouldn't prefer to see players playing in our league fighting for Scottish footballs reputation. Taking back one carrot for Scottish would help convince players to stay here, hopefully work their way into the national team which will help them get notice from a good team.
 
Teams to play in the 16
Below are the teams I believe should play in a 16 team closed league. I'm also proposing two merged teams. I won't offer any justification for the teams I think should be as I feel I've spouted enough ignorance so I'll concentrate my efforts on upsetting the supporters of 4 clubs.
Aberdeen
Celtic
Dunfermline 
Team from Dundee
Falkirk 
Hibernian 
Hearts
Team based in Inverness 
Kilmarnock
Livingston
Motherwell
Partick Thistle
Queen of the south
The Rangers 
St Johnstone
St Mirren
Merging teams
Dundee and Dundee United
I'm going to provide my own fanciful idea on what a merged Dundee team would look like but whether my vision is palatable to either set of supporters, I don't believe an idea of one team Dundee is unsellable but It can't come from the suits, it has to be the fans who want it and push it through. I see the potential for something unique to football being born. Imagine two sets of fans supporting one team. A club with 2 identities, 2 colours, a Harvey two face of a team if you follow the batman metaphor. They wouldn't have a home or away kit, they'd have two kits, playing half their home games in dark blue and half in tangerine and always forcing the away team to play their away kit. If the merge is successful then the rivalry with Aberdeen intensifies. 2 single team cities in close proximity to each other, I'm confident it would galvanise both clubs.
Inverness Caledonian Thistle and Ross County
One team representing football in the highlands to conform with my philosophy. ICT had the misfortune of being formed a decade or 2 too late. If they were formed in the 70s or 80s when Scottish football believed in itself then I believe they'd look a lot stronger. As it is the project hasn't worked out and Ross County are the bigger club. I don't believe you can pick one or the other. This is more of a rebranding of ICT I'm proposing rather than a merge. Ross county if I had my way with restructuring would play in the 20 team league but I think for supporters of Ross county to back a team from Inverness to represent them in the 16 then some admission has to be made that they were bigger than ICT.
Finally
I'd like end with one final musing. One final glimmer of hope if we can't change things for the better in Scottish football is the proposed European league. The brain child of Barcelona and Real Madrid. Two clubs who looked at what the Old Firm did to Scottish football and thought there's a good idea, let's take this back to Spain! They have come up with an idea to take everything that's evil and wrong with modern football and stick them in a closed 20 team league. Fantastic! Shove them in a corner somewhere so the rest of us can concentrate on a competitive European cup. It would be fascinating to see 20 teams built on the foundations of a glory hunting support take part in a competition where only one of them can win. I mean I wouldn't watch a minute of it but I'd certainly keep an eye out for which clubs are finishing in the bottom half of that league with their egos well and truly deflated.

Some good ideas there. To make a good, competitive league the one think you need is revenue sharing. Along with copying ideas from the American sports such as NFL, NBA etc the SFL (forget the spl, spfl rubbish) could be so much better.

[WilliamWallace]

16 team league would be perfect

[babu]

On 01/06/2017 at 11:06, sjc said:

Norway has a professional set up of 2 divisions of 16 teams with Regional pyramid below. They only have a 30 game league program and somehow manage to get the equivalent of €50m/season.

 

 Not much wonder they have few games -  It's 2 weeks travel up the coast on the Hurtigruten   , if say  Odds Ballklubb  are playing up at  Troms0 

 

[sjc]

53 minutes ago, babu said:

 Not much wonder they have few games -  It's 2 weeks travel up the coast on the Hurtigruten   , if say  Odds Ballklubb  are playing up at  Troms0 

 

Sometimes less is more....

[Enigma]

8-8-8 is utter shite.

[Salvo Montalbano]

Just picking up on a few of your points, as highlighted below:

On 2017-6-2 at 15:18, Murgie McDubh said:

<snip>

For me football is all about the story and right now the story is Celtic through superior resources and tactical competition management, will win the league and likely both cups, that is the story for the foreseeable future and that is the problem with our game. If I was to ask those with the authority to say, whether Celtic will win every league title from now until the death of football and they say, no! hopefully Rangers are able to reach a level where they can put in a credible challenge, then I am done with Scottish football. I would say to my club find another tournament to play in or lose me as a supporter. I'm not masochist. I won't support such a one sided competition much longer if there's not a genuine strategy put place to try and address it.

<snip>

Structure

Starting with the top league, expand to 16 teams with 30 games a season. This 16 team league will be closed. No relegation or promotion.

This is going to be a difficult sell but bare with me. There's a train of thought that states Scotland has too many clubs. I don't think that's the case but I do think we have too many clubs competing for the same slice of pie. In this system I'm trying to promote the idea of a single club being giving the task of representing football in their area, discarding the local rivalry

<snip>

16 teams provides variety, it also means every area of Scotland capable of supporting a decent sized football club can be represented and having a handful of teams competing for the same fan base doesn't help. It's not my intention to obliterate the local team. You can't make Raith Rovers fans support Dunfermline instead but could you not have it so they would support them as well as? I want to create a system where communities have their "capital" team as well as their local team.

<snip>

Relegation promotes a negative mindset. I don't think it adds anything to the sport. You can't reach your potential when you're mindset is to avoid being the worst rather than aspiring to be the best.

<snip>

A 30 game season playing each team twice would be a breath of fresh air to football fans. 
It also serves as one part of the puzzle to bridge the competition gap. The format we have in place is the worst I've seen for handing the advantage to the club with the greatest resources. To win the league you have to play the club with the best resources 4 times which is worth up to 11% of the possible points whereas the head to heads in a 30 game season are worth 6% of the total points. Power also shifts away from the club with the big squad, we've all heard the phrase "it's a long season" well a 30 game tournament isn't quite so long and lessens the advantage of having a big squad a little.

<snip>

Replacing the league cup

This tournament I'm proposing was fun to think about and it may be pie in the sky but I genuinely believe it could work and be worthwhile for all involved. It is also crucial to making a league without relegation work. The league cup in every country lacks prestige but in our game there's very little of that as it is. For small nations like ourselves transnational tournaments are the way to go. In Scotland European football is everything. The crowds come out for these matches and it doesn't matter how prestigious the team is, it's a chance for Scottish football to prove its worth.

The tournament would be contested by teams from ourselves, Norway, Sweden and Denmark.

<snip>

Youth system

The system we have is in my opinion ridiculously inefficient. Each youth team produces maybe a couple of players that could play first football a season but more often than not they don't get near a bench let alone on the pitch.

<snip>
 
Teams to play in the 16

<snip>

You say that you can't support a club or a sport in which you can't ever see your club winning - that's fine. But you rhen advocate advocate closed shop system whereby the majority of clubs can't even progress to the top league. You've just lost more people to the game, not increased interest. You then complain about a European Super League being a closed shop being a bad thing. So which is it?

You've seriously misjudged the fans of Raith if you think they'd also support the Pars. You might get Rovers supporters cheering on Dunfermline's opponents but not to the extent they'd go to a game in the away end. As a Pars fan, I've wanted Raith to win on only a handful of occasions - their Coca-Cola cup win, when they were about to get promoted to/relegated out of put league to get derby matches - and you'd be hard pushed to find any Raith fans who'd even admit to that many. 

You then go on to say that relegation promotes a negative mindset (but as I've already alluded to, what does the prospect of not getting access to the closed shop do to the teams not deemed worthy?) and doesn't add anything. What about drama? Big crowds? What kind of crowds would a Livingston v Queen of the South game attract if there was no prospect of winning the title or being relegated?

I'm not convinced about your argument that crowds will come out for Transnational games. There have been decent but not stellar crowds in the Challenge Cup and would fans of the teams regularly in Europe come out for what is essentially a second-rate tournament? Who is paying for air fares? Which broadcaster(s) are you imagining picking up the rights to this cup - especially when UEFA would block the TV companies broadcasting games at the same time as the Champions League and Europa League? As fun as it was to make up, it's a total non-starter I'm afraid. 

I agree with your assertion that the youth system is inefficient but I can't see how your replacement system would work. The SFA may well be interested in producing young players for the national team but there has to be an incentive for the clubs otherwise they're never going to get on board. 

Finally, any system where the top teams are chosen by ground capacity, money in the bank or whether they are a "big" club is a flawed system. Of course there are folk who hate the fact that Hamilton are constant feature of our Premiership but they have produced several decent players and compete despite half their town heading to Glasgow on a Saturday instead. I'd rather a team were there on merit than a team were promoted on non-sporting means.

[EdTheDuck]

The idea that only playing Celtic/Rangers twice a season will catapult the Best of the Rest into title contention is incredibly naive.

Have a look at the points gap after 22 rounds between top of the table and the BotR - it averages about 14 points over the last 15 years.Unless you imagine that Celtic/Rangers are going to lose 5 more games against the 4 newcomers to the league all that will happen is the chasm will be 20 points instead of 30 cuz fewer games.

There's no way to counteract Celtic (and ultimately Rangers) financial advantage in a FPTP 30-odd game 9 month marathon; it isn't like Aberdeen or Hearts having a wage budget twice or 3 times that of Dundee or Kilmarnock, it's them having 10 times the wages budget of Aberdeen & Hearts, £30 million compared to £3 million. Unless you introduce playoffs or reduce the number of games to 15-18 (as in a split Winter/Spring season) no one will have a sniff.

BTW the Scandinavians tried a cross border tournament some years ago, the Royal League; it ran for 3 seasons and was then quietly put out of its misery. The idea it would be revitalized with our participation is, I'm afraid, laughable.

 

 

[FairWeatherFan]

This is dipping into a history lesson rather than dealing with the current set of cirumstances. However can anyone explain the creation of the 10 team Premier Division in the mid-70s? Mainly the the way in which the lower leagues were formed around it.

http://www.scottish-football-historical-archive.co.uk/sflelections.htm

The link above mentions the 1974 election of Ferranti Thistle was necessary to get the SFL to 38 members for preparation for the Premier, First & Second Divisions. It just seems strange to me the apparent acceptance of playing 3x a season in the First & Second. Especially with so much time to plan the structure of the leagues.

[Murgie McDubh]

7 hours ago, Salvo Montalbano said:

Just picking up on a few of your points, as highlighted below:

You say that you can't support a club or a sport in which you can't ever see your club winning - that's fine. But you rhen advocate advocate closed shop system whereby the majority of clubs can't even progress to the top league. You've just lost more people to the game, not increased interest. You then complain about a European Super League being a closed shop being a bad thing. So which is it?

You've seriously misjudged the fans of Raith if you think they'd also support the Pars. You might get Rovers supporters cheering on Dunfermline's opponents but not to the extent they'd go to a game in the away end. As a Pars fan, I've wanted Raith to win on only a handful of occasions - their Coca-Cola cup win, when they were about to get promoted to/relegated out of put league to get derby matches - and you'd be hard pushed to find any Raith fans who'd even admit to that many. 

You then go on to say that relegation promotes a negative mindset (but as I've already alluded to, what does the prospect of not getting access to the closed shop do to the teams not deemed worthy?) and doesn't add anything. What about drama? Big crowds? What kind of crowds would a Livingston v Queen of the South game attract if there was no prospect of winning the title or being relegated?

I'm not convinced about your argument that crowds will come out for Transnational games. There have been decent but not stellar crowds in the Challenge Cup and would fans of the teams regularly in Europe come out for what is essentially a second-rate tournament? Who is paying for air fares? Which broadcaster(s) are you imagining picking up the rights to this cup - especially when UEFA would block the TV companies broadcasting games at the same time as the Champions League and Europa League? As fun as it was to make up, it's a total non-starter I'm afraid. 

I agree with your assertion that the youth system is inefficient but I can't see how your replacement system would work. The SFA may well be interested in producing young players for the national team but there has to be an incentive for the clubs otherwise they're never going to get on board. 

Finally, any system where the top teams are chosen by ground capacity, money in the bank or whether they are a "big" club is a flawed system. Of course there are folk who hate the fact that Hamilton are constant feature of our Premiership but they have produced several decent players and compete despite half their town heading to Glasgow on a Saturday instead. I'd rather a team were there on merit than a team were promoted on non-sporting means.

I knew at some point I'd be accused of hypocrisy but there is a distinction I think. My proposal is an attempt to provide as many title challengers as possible and give as many people in Scotland a reason to care about it as possible while the European league is designed to preserve the rich teams' legacies and maximise their earnings. 

I appreciate how absurd it looks attempting to increase variety by closing the competition but to make the league winnable for more teams you have to eliminate as many advantages Celtic have as you can. One of those advantages is the stability of being safe in the premiership and that's something only one other team could argue they have.

You may have more authority than me on the intensity of the Dunfermline Raith rivalry but I don't think you can say with certainty that some Raith fans couldn't embrace the idea of 1 team representing fife football in a 16 league if it's sold properly. Not every fan feels the same level of dislike as others towards their traditional rivals. Despite being a Dandy I quite like Dundee United. That feeling changes on match day right enough but I'd back them against many teams in Scotland.

You talk about sporting merit and I agree with you with the system we have in place Hamilton have earned their right to compete. With the system we have in place Hamilton are contributing just as much to the strength of the premiership as anyone else could in their place because with the system we have in place it doesn't matter who the 11 are to act as canon fodder for Celtic it will be the same result come May. The system we have doesn't work. None of us have any plans short or long term to challenge for the title so what's point in any of us right now being in the premiership? You've accused me of closing the door on clubs but the door's already closed. What's the point of promotion and relegation when there's glass ceiling you can't penetrate? What I actually want is the door to be opened for as many as possible but to do that you need clubs as strong as you can get them. 

I don't agree with your view of the relegation battle. If it doesn't involve your team most people are meh and if your team are in a relegation battle because they have shown a lack of fight they won't get bumper crowds for a relegation decider. Aberdeen under Mark McGhee were in real danger of relegation and we were getting crowds of less than 8000. The story of the top of our game is what matters. If you want captivate the folk who only watch the EPL, the folk who've lost interest in Scottish football and the folk who are folk apathetic to anything that doesn't involve their team, you need to change the story at the top. It's the main course and everything else is sauce and right now we're being served roast dung so the other stories of Scottish football however good, can't improve the flavour.

I think you've too readily dismissive of a transnational tournament between 4 similar sized nations. First it's not a 3rd tier European tournament. The best 8 teams of each nation compete even if they don't all compete in the group stage. You've asked me to provide details regarding travel expenses and TV deals, which you know I can't but I look at the pro12 rugby who already have to fly twice to Italy, 4 times to Ireland and have invited a South African team to play in the in the league, I can't see travel being a big issue for us. I'd say it was up to you to provide evidence to dismiss outright. Say there was no Europa league and I tried to pitch the idea of 4 qualifying rounds where you're team could be flying off to the likes of Moldova, Armenia and Kazakhstan and yet we celebrate the achievement of qualifying for this tournament? If you can get a TV deal for the league cup group stages I'm pretty sure a little something could be worked out for tournament featuring Rosenborg, Malmo, Copenhagen, Brøndby amongst others. You brought up the champions league and their control of broadcasting and I've already said what I think of that but whatever the situation there you could still play and broadcast on europa league days. I'm in no position to say for sure this tournament would work but to neither are you in any position to dismiss it as a non starter.

Youth system and again I'm no position to prove it could work but you asked what's in it for the clubs. For most clubs I don't see what they gain from a youth system. They must be expensive to run and most of the time they don't churn out first team players. I would say stage 1 (the academy) and stage 2 (education at a league club) work and we're producing capable first team players then I don't see the difference between getting these players at 14 and getting these when they're ready for first team football.

[Murgie McDubh]

4 hours ago, EdTheDuck said:

The idea that only playing Celtic/Rangers twice a season will catapult the Best of the Rest into title contention is incredibly naive.

BTW the Scandinavians tried a cross border tournament some years ago, the Royal League; it ran for 3 seasons and was then quietly put out of its misery. The idea it would be revitalized with our participation is, I'm afraid, laughable.

 

 

It wouldn't catapult but it would be a step in the right direction. They have the massive advantage in resources but they have all subtle advantages as well.

What was the reason behind its failure? Was it bickering, format or interest? The ingredients are there for an exciting tournament and just because of one failed attempt doesn't mean a few adjustments couldn't make it work. 

[Salvo Montalbano]

8 hours ago, Murgie McDubh said:

<snip>

You may have more authority than me on the intensity of the Dunfermline Raith rivalry but I don't think you can say with certainty that some Raith fans couldn't embrace the idea of 1 team representing fife football in a 16 league if it's sold properly.

<snip> 

You've accused me of closing the door on clubs but the door's already closed. What's the point of promotion and relegation when there's glass ceiling you can't penetrate? What I actually want is the door to be opened for as many as possible but to do that you need clubs as strong as you can get them. 

I don't agree with your view of the relegation battle. If it doesn't involve your team most people are meh and if your team are in a relegation battle because they have shown a lack of fight they won't get bumper crowds for a relegation decider. Aberdeen under Mark McGhee were in real danger of relegation and we were getting crowds of less than 8000. The story of the top of our game is what matters. If you want captivate the folk who only watch the EPL, the folk who've lost interest in Scottish football and the folk who are folk apathetic to anything that doesn't involve their team, you need to change the story at the top. It's the main course and everything else is sauce and right now we're being served roast dung so the other stories of Scottish football however good, can't improve the flavour.

I think you've too readily dismissive of a transnational tournament between 4 similar sized nations. First it's not a 3rd tier European tournament. The best 8 teams of each nation compete even if they don't all compete in the group stage. You've asked me to provide details regarding travel expenses and TV deals, which you know I can't but I look at the pro12 rugby who already have to fly twice to Italy, 4 times to Ireland and have invited a South African team to play in the in the league, I can't see travel being a big issue for us. I'd say it was up to you to provide evidence to dismiss outright.

<snip>

If you can get a TV deal for the league cup group stages I'm pretty sure a little something could be worked out for tournament featuring Rosenborg, Malmo, Copenhagen, Brøndby amongst others. You brought up the champions league and their control of broadcasting and I've already said what I think of that but whatever the situation there you could still play and broadcast on europa league days. I'm in no position to say for sure this tournament would work but to neither are you in any position to dismiss it as a non starter.

Youth system and again I'm no position to prove it could work but you asked what's in it for the clubs. For most clubs I don't see what they gain from a youth system. They must be expensive to run and most of the time they don't churn out first team players. I would say stage 1 (the academy) and stage 2 (education at a league club) work and we're producing capable first team players then I don't see the difference between getting these players at 14 and getting these when they're ready for first team football.

Good of you to reply. From the points again I've highlighted:

- How many Raith fans would count as "some"? You may well get a few Rovers fans who wouldn't be against the idea of supporting the Pars in a game (although given the cheers that go up at Stark's Park and Central Park, Cowdenbeath if they announce Dunfermline are behind at half time, I can't see them being numerous if they do actually exist) you're not going to convince them to spend money supporting us. Especially if there is some sort of second tier competition for the clubs that have been excluded from the closed shop. Or are we just binning 20 odd teams with hundreds of years of tradition? 

- There may well be a glass ceiling in terms of winning the title but you do know there are other rewards, right? While you seem dismissive of the Europa League, for many supporters and clubs it is a great adventure even of it only lasts two or three preliminary rounds. You'd be saying to all the clubs outwith the closed shop that they couldn't ever get to play in Europe - either on a UEFA tournament or the transnational cup you're proposing. So if a group of players come through at that team or a sugar daddy wants to invest in his home town club? They're not going anywhere so why bother?

- Teams occasionally go down due to a lack of fight but more often than not there is an almighty battle at the bottom. I well remember St Mirren and ourselves being rubbish for months then going on great runs as we tried to avoid the drop. St Mirren v Dunfermline was moved to a Monday night for live TV Coverage (so much for everybody else being "meh") and the old Love Street was packed including I think 2,000 away fans. There is interest in relegation battles in every major league in Europe, so we're going to have to disagree on that one.

- I'm really not sure why you think people who only watch the EPL are going to be somehow captivated by a Scottish league, regardless of whether it is more competitive than it is now. There is no evidence to suggest that more people watched when Hearts challenged Celtic and old Rangers. There is no evidence to suggest that EPL fans watch other major European Leagues where there is real quality competion (I'd be surprised if rhe viewing figures for this season's dramatic Eredivise finale reached more than and few tens of thousands even though the EPL title race and relegation battle was done and dusted). If you mean Scottish armchair fans then maybe you'd have a point (although the ones who watch the EPL and not the SPFL at the moment talk about the gap in quality, not the lack of title challenge, and you're never going to won over those idiots) but you'll have alienated so many fans of the clubs not included then the net result could well be negligible anyway.

- I don't see how you could claim that a European competition that doesn't contain clubs from England, France, Spain, Italy, Germany, Portugal, the Netherlands, etc could be anything other than 3rd rate. Indeed if there is to be a closed European League in the future then it may well become a 4th rate league. As much as you and I might like the idea of Rosenborg, Malmo, Copenhagen, Brøndby or whomever for their history and almost exoticness, the vast majority of casual viewers don't care. This becomes compounded if teams qualify for the groups of the major tournaments as we'd then lose out on the biggest drawing teams. 

- As for travel, the South African team is to be sponsored by an airline who are paying for air fares etc in the same way Toronto Wolfpack are in Rugby League. Maybe we can get an airline to sponsor your tournament but who flies between Scotland and Scandinavia who would be prepared to do so? The thing with the Pro 12 is that firstly travel between the 3 home nations and Italy can be done easily by low-cost airlines and secondly the clubs are either fully or partly owned by the respective rugby unions. So the SRU will contribute towards the travel (and indeed pays almost all of it IIRC). Can you see the SFA agreeing to that? Especially since in rugby it's the de facto national tournament (there are no others for the Scots, Irish, Italian and Welsh pro teams to play in; the next tier down is semi-pro) but in Scotland there is already a viable competition.

- On the subject of TV rights, the League Cup groups are on at a time when there is very little competitive football on anyway so the TV deal was an easy enough sell. The transnational league would clash with Champions League and Europa League as well as English, German, Spanish etc domestic league and cup football whichever night the games were played on. You also say that you can televise games on the same night as their Europa League - firstly I don't think you can, and secondly who is going to watch Dunfermline v Malmo when Southampton v Inter or Arsenal/Man Utd v anyone is on? You could even be clashing with Celtic, Rangers or Aberdeen if they make it through to the group stages. So what's your audience? More importantly, which broadcaster is going to pay anything for a tournament where the viewing figures are going to be so low and so variable (other than maybe BBC Alba!)?

- Finally, I'm terms of youth system, every club hopes they unearth a McArthur or McArthy or Tierney or whomever. At our level, we've not had much success but we sold PJ Crossan to Celtic and hope to get a couple more into out first team then sell them on. Also, many of the players who don't make it at Dunfermline go on to play at lower levels. If the SFA had their way, they'd have 20 or so players at each age group who they could bring through into the national team, totally ignoring the late developers and the likes of Andy Robertson who started off at Queens Park.and who could have slipped through the net had Project Brave been there at the time. I wouldn't trust the SFA to run a raffle, let alone a youth policy.

[EdTheDuck]

17 hours ago, Murgie McDubh said:

It wouldn't catapult but it would be a step in the right direction. They have the massive advantage in resources but they have all subtle advantages as well.

What was the reason behind its failure? Was it bickering, format or interest? The ingredients are there for an exciting tournament and just because of one failed attempt doesn't mean a few adjustments couldn't make it work. 

I’m not convinced it would be a step in the right direction, for a whole bunch of reasons but that’s just my opinion.

The Royal League was played as a 12 team tournament with teams from Sweden, Denmark & Norway playing in 3 groups of 4. It failed because fans didn’t turn up for it and the 4^th edition was cancelled because TV abandoned it ahead of the 2008/09 (4th) edition.; it was never revived.

Edited June 5, 2017 by EdTheDuck

[effeffsee_the2nd]

I’m not convinced it would be a step in the right direction, for a whole bunch of reasons but that’s just my opinion.
The Royal League was played as a 12 team tournament with teams from Sweden, Denmark & Norway playing in 3 groups of 4. It failed because fans didn’t turn up for it and the 4^th edition was cancelled because TV abandoned it ahead of the 2008/09 (4th) edition.; it was never revived.

I like the idea of it but think once the novalty wears off youd be in a worse position than when you started

[tamba_trio]

As a thought (and here me out on this):

What if Premier Division games got played on a Sunday, rather than a Saturday. 

So on a Saturday at 3pm you'd have the lower league stuff.  

At 5:30pm there's a live free-to-air game from the Premiership.  (If Celtic are playing in the Champions League on a Tuesday, it's automatically them to avoid too much disruption)

On a Sunday 4 games kick off at 3pm with BT Sports or Sky or whoever able to show any of them live.  At 5:30pm the final match is shown live on Sky or BT.  

The idea is that, by showing a free to air game on a Saturday night, you'd get some media coverage of the league prior to the main card of games.  There could also be highlights from the Championship after full time.  Then, on a Sunday night, you'd be able to show highlights on the BBC of the days action and not worry about denting the exposure of Match of the Day.  Games wouldn't need re-arranged for the Europa league so we'd all be pretty sure of what was happening each week.

Anyway it was just a thought.  The lack of routine to Scottish football is another thing that drives me nuts.  Some weeks we've a Friday night game.  Sometimes a Saturday lunchtime (and by lunchtime it could be 12:00, 12:15, 12:30, 12:45 or 1pm) and sometimes Sunday lunchtime.  Occasionally it's Sunday at 3pm.  How can you expect fans to build a matchday routine whilst screwing them over so badly?

[EdTheDuck]

6 hours ago, tamba_trio said:

As a thought (and here me out on this):

What if Premier Division games got played on a Sunday, rather than a Saturday. 

So on a Saturday at 3pm you'd have the lower league stuff.  

At 5:30pm there's a live free-to-air game from the Premiership.  (If Celtic are playing in the Champions League on a Tuesday, it's automatically them to avoid too much disruption)

On a Sunday 4 games kick off at 3pm with BT Sports or Sky or whoever able to show any of them live.  At 5:30pm the final match is shown live on Sky or BT.  

The idea is that, by showing a free to air game on a Saturday night, you'd get some media coverage of the league prior to the main card of games.  There could also be highlights from the Championship after full time.  Then, on a Sunday night, you'd be able to show highlights on the BBC of the days action and not worry about denting the exposure of Match of the Day.  Games wouldn't need re-arranged for the Europa league so we'd all be pretty sure of what was happening each week.

Anyway it was just a thought.  The lack of routine to Scottish football is another thing that drives me nuts.  Some weeks we've a Friday night game.  Sometimes a Saturday lunchtime (and by lunchtime it could be 12:00, 12:15, 12:30, 12:45 or 1pm) and sometimes Sunday lunchtime.  Occasionally it's Sunday at 3pm.  How can you expect fans to build a matchday routine whilst screwing them over so badly?

 

We have to kick off all games at 3pm on a Saturday to win the war against the German Empire!

...

Or maybe that was closing pubs between 2:30pm and 5pm to get the drunken working class back in the munitions factories...

Anyway, switch the kick off time from 3pm on a Saturday and it's just man playing God, interfering with the laws of nature unleashing who knows what, innit. 3 'o' clock on a Saturday is probably in the bible, mate, you see if it ain't...*rolls eyes*

[tamba_trio]

On 8/15/2017 at 20:08, EdTheDuck said:

 

We have to kick off all games at 3pm on a Saturday to win the war against the German Empire!

...

Or maybe that was closing pubs between 2:30pm and 5pm to get the drunken working class back in the munitions factories...

Anyway, switch the kick off time from 3pm on a Saturday and it's just man playing God, interfering with the laws of nature unleashing who knows what, innit. 3 'o' clock on a Saturday is probably in the bible, mate, you see if it ain't...*rolls eyes*

Hahaha, I love the idea of switching it to a Sunday now just to hear the squeals.  It'd be hillarious.

It just pisses me off that we can't even have a settled weekly schedule.  Some weeks we have a Friday night game.  Sometimes it's Saturday lunchtime.  Sometimes there's games on a Sunday.  And lunchtime kick-offs can be 12:00, 12:15, 12:30 or 12:45 depending on what way the wind is blowing.  Also we occasionally throw a Championship match at 5:15 on a Saturday night, but only sometimes.

BTW, with regard to restructuring the league like American Sports:

WEST - Celtic, Rangers, Partick Th, St Mirren, Morton

EAST - Hearts, Hibs, Dunfermline, Falkirk, Raith R

SOUTH - Motherwell, Hamilton, Kilmarnock, Ayr

NORTH - Aberdeen, St Johnstone, Dundee, Dundee Utd, Inverness CT, Ross C

It'd be fantastic...

[EdTheDuck]

2 hours ago, tamba_trio said:

Hahaha, I love the idea of switching it to a Sunday now just to hear the squeals.  It'd be hillarious.

It just pisses me off that we can't even have a settled weekly schedule.  Some weeks we have a Friday night game.  Sometimes it's Saturday lunchtime.  Sometimes there's games on a Sunday.  And lunchtime kick-offs can be 12:00, 12:15, 12:30 or 12:45 depending on what way the wind is blowing.  Also we occasionally throw a Championship match at 5:15 on a Saturday night, but only sometimes.

BTW, with regard to restructuring the league like American Sports:

WEST - Celtic, Rangers, Partick Th, St Mirren, Morton

EAST - Hearts, Hibs, Dunfermline, Falkirk, Raith R

SOUTH - Motherwell, Hamilton, Kilmarnock, Ayr

NORTH - Aberdeen, St Johnstone, Dundee, Dundee Utd, Inverness CT, Ross C

It'd be fantastic...

Read this article, it pretty much sums up the reason we should go down the route of playoffs or aperture/clausura or some system that adds meaning to games for The Rest Sums up the way I think. (Incidentally, I believe Chile are going back to a single tournament next year, 2018, driven by the big clubs of course)

http://www.goal.com/en/news/1699/chile/2010/11/02/2195050/chile-debate-the-long-season-is-great-for-the-big-three-but

[Blackmick]

Scotland has too many clubs 42 is far too much for the size of the country.

2 leagues of 16 is enough, regionalise the rest.

Phase 1

Teams  play each other Home and Away once, 30 games

Phase 2

Split into top 8 and bottom 8, 37 Games

2 Teams relegated

League below 1 straight promotion Playoffs for the second spot.

Introduce Alcohol sales inside grounds on a trial basis with some clubs.

Get rid of Hampden and the money saved from that can go into Youth development schemes,improving clubs facilities, Safe standing areas for clubs etc etc