League reconstruction: Let's hear your view

[EdTheDuck]

Just now, Bazil85 said:

You clearly aren't following what I'm saying. I'll try simplify it further. First of all, it's two separate issues. 

1. 

The Rangers and Celtic games are losing their appeal. They aren't close to the draw they once were. My opinion is something has to be done to safeguard that fixture. Having it up to seven times a season just isn't doing it. We are about to lose a major sponsor in Scotland, TV deal is one of the worst in Europe and money in real terms is reducing in Scottish football every single year. For that reason I think something needs to be done to shake things up. Financially speaking we are screwed but for longer term gains Scotland can do things to improve the game and generate more excitement and a less bleak future. 

Leads on to 2. 

Bigger leagues would protect this fixture. It could also reignite excitement in fans of the game that have turned away by having more variety and more interest generating games. Try to understand when I talk about the derbies I'm talking about at fan level, when I'm talking about less Rangers Celtic fixtures I'm talking about the excitement and neutral interest these games used to generate. 

If things stay as is, more fans will likely lose interest and our game on a wider scale (such as OF games) will continue to shrink. 

Patronize much.

Your entire post is based on myths and fallacies.

[EdTheDuck]

The main problems with Scottish football is

1The dreadful youth development in this country (or if you prefer, in that light, the dreadful lack of recruitment of good foreigners)

2 The OF(ex)

The leagues are watched by more people than almost any league in Europe and the numbers currently attending are the highest they have been since the freak years following WW2

[Bazil85]

3 minutes ago, EdTheDuck said:

Patronize much.

Your entire post is based on myths and fallacies.

Show me one thing I've said that's a myth? 

[Bazil85]

7 minutes ago, EdTheDuck said:

There are far more leagues in Europe with 10, 12, 14 teams playing X3 and X4 and with splits of one kind or another than there are leagues playing X2, this is because small countries recognise that they have a limited number of large towns/cities and therefore a limited number of teams to generate fan/TV interest. 8 of the 13 countries above us in the rankings who play X2 have populations of 35 - 150 million (the other 5 are all double or treble the population of Scotland) - are you seriously suggesting a backwater like Scotland with 5 million could mimic these countries and get the same result? My arse.

 

Five countries directly above us in rankings below. Pretty sure we're bigger than Belarus or Serbia in football league fan numbers, are you making the mistake of looking at population over fans that actually attend games? 

As you continue to go up the numbers more and more leagues have bigger numbers. 

Serbia – 16

Belarus – 16

Bulgaria – 14

Sweden – 16

Azerbaijan – 8

[Bazil85]

7 minutes ago, EdTheDuck said:

The main problems with Scottish football is

1The dreadful youth development in this country (or if you prefer, in that light, the dreadful lack of recruitment of good foreigners)

2 The OF(ex)

The leagues are watched by more people than almost any league in Europe and the numbers currently attending are the highest they have been since the freak years following WW2

Miss-leading figure. it's the league (singular) the stat that always gets lorded about is Scottish Premier is the most attended top flight in Europe per person.

Figures are completely skewed because of the bigot brothers. If you look at stats for person per population attending football games at all levels (not just premier leagues) in Scotland against other leagues, it's not that great. Look at the fans England get at various levels then look at the massive drop off below our biggest 5-7 clubs up here. 

[EdTheDuck]

Just now, Bazil85 said:

Show me one thing I've said that's a myth? 

The idea that more people will turn up for games in a bigger league. Utter bunk. Fewer would. And TV would pay less.

[ShaggysBeard]

I think I must be one of the few that doesn't think there is much wrong with the domestic game. Quality obviously isn't great but with the levels of money players can earn at average levels in England and elsewhere attract players out of the Scottish top league, it's difficult to do much about that.

Too many teams for a country of 5million is about all I can see that's a hinderance.

[EdTheDuck]

Just now, Bazil85 said:

Five countries directly above us in rankings below. Pretty sure we're bigger than Belarus or Serbia in football league fan numbers, are you making the mistake of looking at population over fans that actually attend games? 

As you continue to go up the numbers more and more leagues have bigger numbers. 

Serbia – 16

Belarus – 16

Bulgaria – 14

Sweden – 16

Azerbaijan – 8

How about Switzerland or Austria or Croatia or Denmark, countries around the size of Scotland but miles ahead of us in the rankings? All with 10 or 12 team leagues.

The size of the league is completely irrelevant. Player development is what matters. We are shite at it.

 

 

[1320Lichtie]

I think I must be one of the few that doesn't think there is much wrong with the domestic game. Quality obviously isn't great but with the levels of money players can earn at average levels in England and elsewhere attract players out of the Scottish top league, it's difficult to do much about that.
Too many teams for a country of 5million is about all I can see that's a hinderance.

Too many teams, explain

[EdTheDuck]

On 2/8/2018 at 14:28, Bazil85 said:

Miss-leading figure. it's the league (singular) the stat that always gets lorded about is Scottish Premier is the most attended top flight in Europe per person.

Figures are completely skewed because of the bigot brothers. If you look at stats for person per population attending football games at all levels (not just premier leagues) in Scotland against other leagues, it's not that great. Look at the fans England get at various levels then look at the massive drop off below our biggest 5-7 clubs up here. 

Really? 50 million people versus 5 million? There are around 40 teams in England that attract more fans than our third best supported team because of their population. Do you have any idea of how this works at all?

Edited February 9, 2018 by EdTheDuck

[Bazil85]

23 minutes ago, EdTheDuck said:

The idea that more people will turn up for games in a bigger league. Utter bunk. Fewer would. And TV would pay less.

Fewer would turn up to renfrewhire, Dundee, Highland, Ayrshire derbies if they were in the top flight? Less interest in Rangers Celtic fixture if they were only twice a season? Okay

[Bazil85]

16 minutes ago, EdTheDuck said:

How about Switzerland or Austria or Croatia or Denmark, countries around the size of Scotland but miles ahead of us in the rankings? All with 10 or 12 team leagues.

The size of the league is completely irrelevant. Player development is what matters. We are shite at it.

 

 

They are almost the only leagues out of the 26 that are same or smaller than us. Our average attendance in the top flight is more than double three of those leagues. We should have bigger leagues. Ever wonder why we're behind these leagues when we have bigger clubs attracting more fans? 

Denmark average top flight crowds - 5,781

Swiss - 10,471

Croatia 2,724

Austria - 7,0246

Scotland - 16,285

[EdTheDuck]

Just now, Bazil85 said:

Fewer would turn up to renfrewhire, Dundee, Highland, Ayrshire derbies if they were in the top flight? Less interest in Rangers Celtic fixture if they were only twice a season? Okay

You think more people will turn up for a mid-table nothing at stake Renfrewshire derby compared to a Renfrewshire derby that means one of the teams wins a championship or the other qualifies for the playoffs? Or do you believe that just being in the top division will mean more people turn up for a meaningless game?

The OF(ex) derby is the same as every other game, it will attract more attention when there is something hanging on it. At the moment the only real interest is 'how many will  Celtic win by'.

[1320Lichtie]

Fewer would turn up to renfrewhire, Dundee, Highland, Ayrshire derbies if they were in the top flight? Less interest in Rangers Celtic fixture if they were only twice a season? Okay

 

Compare Dundee United v Hibs in the top flight and United v Hibs in the second division

 

It still blows my mind that someone is genuinely saying that taking away 2 Rangers v Celtic games a season and replacing them with an ICT v County or a St Mirren v Morton will mean that the league attracts more neutral fans, TV money and sponsors. I wish it was the case, but it most definitely isn’t

 

How often is Motherwell v Hamilton on the tele or Dundee v St Johnstone? Surely these derby games will be on Sky all the time? No?

[EdTheDuck]

Just now, Bazil85 said:

They are almost the only leagues out of the 26 that are same or smaller than us. Our average attendance in the top flight is more than double three of those leagues. We should have bigger leagues. Ever wonder why we're behind these leagues when we have bigger clubs attracting more fans? 

Denmark average top flight crowds - 5,781

Swiss - 10,471

Croatia 2,724

Austria - 7,0246

Scotland - 16,285

You claim our figures are skewed by the OF and then use them to try and prove a point?

We are behind them because player development is shite & money is wasted paying inflated wages to Jocks who can't play football when we should be buying half decent foreigners for sweeties from Eastern Europe to fill the gap while we get our development right.

Nothing to do with the size of the league

[ShaggysBeard]

1 minute ago, 1320Lichtie said:

 

Too many teams, explain

 

I wasn't offering a solution. It's just the way the country developed.

If you were to do a round trip from Montrose down to Arbroath, Dundee round to Forfar and back to Montrose. You'll have done a mere 60 mile roadtrip and the collective population under 200,000 and containing 5 senior clubs. No wonder it's hard to run a club there's not enough fans to go around.

In England, you have places like Birmingham, over one million and contains only two clubs. Manchester, one city two clubs but populated by 500,000. Leeds, one club city with population of 750,000. Newcastle, one club city and a population of 280,000. Sunderland one club and a population 275,000. Even the smaller sides, Preston one club town of 122,719. Plymouth one club town of 260,000.

Hypothetical shite, but imagine the leagues developed differently and the 400,000 of Fife were represented by one senior club, be a lot less teams in the league but be much bigger clubs.

42 senior clubs for a population of 5,000,000 is too much. It's no wonder clubs are struggling and it's just the Old Firm, 5 or 6 medium sized clubs and a barrel load of tiny clubs.

I am of the opinion we should just accept that this is the way it is and enjoy what we have.

[vikingTON]

24 minutes ago, EdTheDuck said:

How about Switzerland or Austria or Croatia or Denmark, countries around the size of Scotland but miles ahead of us in the rankings? All with 10 or 12 team leagues.

Scotland has far more viable professional teams than Croatia. The fifth largest club in Croatia in 2016-17 had a lower attendance than every single team in the Scottish Championship other than Dumbarton:

http://www.european-football-statistics.co.uk/attn.htm

For you to even cite Croatia as a credible comparison to the Scottish game is massive own goal on your part. 

There is an inherent limit on the number of clubs that could play in the top-flight in these countries.  There are more viable top-flight clubs in Scottish football, because Scottish football is better attended across the board than any of its peers. Scotland can therefore sustain a larger top flight without having adverse effects. Whether the clubs choose to do so is another matter - but the idea that it couldn't possibly be sustained due to being a wee country like Croatia is complete and utter nonsense. 

 

[EdTheDuck]

Just now, 1320Lichtie said:

 

Compare Dundee United v Hibs in the top flight and United v Hibs in the second division

 

It still blows my mind that someone is genuinely saying that taking away 2 Rangers v Celtic games a season and replacing them with an ICT v County or a St Mirren v Morton will mean that the league attracts more neutral fans, TV money and sponsors. I wish it was the case, but it most definitely isn’t

 

How often is Motherwell v Hamilton on the tele or Dundee v St Johnstone? Surely these derby games will be on Sky all the time? No?

He suffers from Dunty level of delusion, he really does.

[1320Lichtie]

I wasn't offering a solution. It's just the way the country developed.

If you were to do a round trip from Montrose down to Arbroath, Dundee round to Forfar and back to Montrose. You'll have done a mere 60 mile roadtrip and the collective population under 200,000 and containing 5 senior clubs. No wonder it's hard to run a club there's not enough fans to go around.

In England, you have places like Birmingham, over one million and contains only two clubs. Manchester, one city two clubs but populated by 500,000. Leeds, one club city with population of 750,000. Newcastle, one club city and a population of 280,000. Sunderland one club and a population 275,000. Even the smaller sides, Preston one club town of 122,719. Plymouth one club town of 260,000.

Hypothetical shite, but imagine the leagues developed differently and the 400,000 of Fife were represented by one senior club, be a lot less teams in the league but be much bigger clubs.

42 senior clubs for a population of 5,000,000 is too much. It's no wonder clubs are struggling and it's just the Old Firm, 5 or 6 medium sized clubs and a barrel load of tiny clubs.

I am of the opinion we should just accept that this is the way it is and enjoy what we have.

 

And what difference would it make getting rid of these clubs at the level they’re at? They’re self sustaining and make an absolute pittance in the grand scheme of things and the league structure.

 

What would getting rid of them achieve? Seriously???

 

 

[ShaggysBeard]

1 minute ago, 1320Lichtie said:

 

And what difference would it make getting rid of these clubs at the level they’re at? They’re self sustaining and make a pittance in the grand scheme of things. What would getting rid of them achieve?
 

 

Absolutely nothing. I said that in the first line. Nothing can be done now.