Jump to content

Time for mandatory mergers?


Recommended Posts

What's your issue with the plan?



I seriously wonder why you don't see the flaws in this pish?

As a Falkirk supporter merging with Livvie and playing at Almondvale....really?

Entertaining if nothing else.

Scottish football does not need to be aligned to the PRO12.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 80
  • Created
  • Last Reply
Names are open to negotiation mate. The name Dundee United makes a lot of sense as we are literally uniting Dundee. I guess the Tayside Tigers is another option.
I chose the Border Reivers as that is a really cool name for a football team.


I think you mean for a now defunct Rugby team?
Link to comment
Share on other sites

32 minutes ago, roman_bairn said:

 

 


I seriously wonder why you don't see the flaws in this pish?

As a Falkirk supporter merging with Livvie and playing at Almondvale....really?

Entertaining if nothing else.

Scottish football does not need to be aligned to the PRO12.

 

 

Almondvale is the bigger stadium. 

You dont see the need for stronger West Lothian side?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Forcing the poor people of Dumbarton, the historic & ancient capital of Strathclyde, into the ignominy of a three hour round trip on bus & train to see their local team, in Renfewshire no less, is a scandal. Would encourage you to seriously re-evaluate your plans there. In fact, just do us all a favour & shut us down.

#weareallreivers

 

 

BRFC.png

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 08/06/2017 at 18:14, tamba_trio said:

No teams are going to do that - they're much happier to stand under them with a begging bowl hoping for scraps.

Merges would get rid of one of the main strengths of the Scottish game - the local derbies.  They are usually the best attended matches of the season so it seems silly to do away with them.

No relegation though - I can see an appeal in this.  It'd help clubs plan financially.  But if this were to happen it'd need to be like the AFL/NFL/MLB etc where each team has a chance of winning the league.  That's everyone's goal at the start of the season.  If it doesn't work, you'd be able to blood youngsters and plan for the next season (which appeals to me more than a crappy relegation battle).

Teams not being promoted isn't a big deal.  The Juniors cope fine with it.  The Highland League hasn't walked into Utopia with the opportunity.

But everything hinges on having a competitive title race.  Which we'll never have.  So we're screwed.

 

 

I pretty much agree with this.

We imagine the yanks are all about big city teams but rivalry plays a huge part in their sports too, like Detroit-Green Bay or Giants-Eagles.

Even more so in their College Football, the intra-state ‘derbies’ are fearsome. And they set up their leagues (conferences) so that every year we have rivalry weekend, all the way down through Division III of the NCAA. Guaranteed.

Now, like you, I appreciate we’ll never have an American style set-up but a little blue sky thinking never did anyone any harm…

Maybe we can’t have a competitive single division but…next best thing

Having something tangible to go after, a regional division or ‘league’ title and a crack at a National championship game…surely if Kilmarnock & Ayr or Morton & St Mirren were going for the Western Division title it would draw in better crowds, at least in the run-in? No? And the derbies are guaranteed in, say, a 20 team, 2 ‘league’, 4 division set-up!

Well, who wouldn’t like that? The whole of Scottish football, of course but still…

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Quote

Even more so in their College Football, the intra-state ‘derbies’ are fearsome. And they set up their leagues (conferences) so that every year we have rivalry weekend, all the way down through Division III of the NCAA. Guaranteed.

They only play each team once though. And some rivalries aren't geographical, like Michigan or Florida v Notre Dame. And while winning a conference is all fine and dandy, nobody nationally really cares unless it's one of the big 5. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

19 hours ago, Salvo Montalbano said:

They only play each team once though. And some rivalries aren't geographical, like Michigan or Florida v Notre Dame. And while winning a conference is all fine and dandy, nobody nationally really cares unless it's one of the big 5. 

Well yes, to play each other 4 times they'd need a roster of about 150 players. Ha!

Anyway I can't remember what my point was about the yanks and their rivalries, but more importantly the power five conferences all have two divisions nowadays and a championship game (with the exception of the Big 12 conference of course whose 10 teams play a round robin then the top 2 play the title game...curiously for the uninitiated, the Big 10 conference had 12 teams; those crazy Americans eh?).

For clubs like Aberdeen, Dundee, St Johnstone, Hearts, Hibs, Dunfermline, Kilmarnock, St Mirren et al going for a division title (and a 'conference' title game) would add something tangible to the humdrum league games...and it would be a way of expanding the top league to 20 teams without huge swathes of nothing at stake mid-table games...or maybe not.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 hours ago, EdTheDuck said:

Well yes, to play each other 4 times they'd need a roster of about 150 players. Ha!

Anyway I can't remember what my point was about the yanks and their rivalries, but more importantly the power five conferences all have two divisions nowadays and a championship game (with the exception of the Big 12 conference of course whose 10 teams play a round robin then the top 2 play the title game...curiously for the uninitiated, the Big 10 conference had 12 teams; those crazy Americans eh?).

For clubs like Aberdeen, Dundee, St Johnstone, Hearts, Hibs, Dunfermline, Kilmarnock, St Mirren et al going for a division title (and a 'conference' title game) would add something tangible to the humdrum league games...and it would be a way of expanding the top league to 20 teams without huge swathes of nothing at stake mid-table games...or maybe not.

 

 

I'd agree - if Aberdeen can get 40,000 fans to go to Glasgow for a League Cup Final (bearing in mind they only had to play 3 games to get there) then I'm sure they'd have no problem selling out Pittodrie for a North or East of Scotland title.  I love the idea: four divisions (north, south, east, west).  At the end of the season the champions play off for the title and the runners up (and maybe 3rd place sides) play off for a Europa league spot.  Or even two divisions (north and south, east and west or however).  It'd maximise derby games and make the end of the season much less of a yawn.

The problem I have - when I try to think of how this'd work - is how the leagues would be split.  Some poor sods still need to be with Celtic and Rangers.   But the basic idea (coupled with revenue being SHARED rather than hoarded) is the best I've heard and a million times better than the usual boring 16, 20, 8-8-8 guff.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

58 minutes ago, tamba_trio said:

I'd agree - if Aberdeen can get 40,000 fans to go to Glasgow for a League Cup Final (bearing in mind they only had to play 3 games to get there) then I'm sure they'd have no problem selling out Pittodrie for a North or East of Scotland title.  I love the idea: four divisions (north, south, east, west).  At the end of the season the champions play off for the title and the runners up (and maybe 3rd place sides) play off for a Europa league spot.  Or even two divisions (north and south, east and west or however).  It'd maximise derby games and make the end of the season much less of a yawn.

The problem I have - when I try to think of how this'd work - is how the leagues would be split.  Some poor sods still need to be with Celtic and Rangers.   But the basic idea (coupled with revenue being SHARED rather than hoarded) is the best I've heard and a million times better than the usual boring 16, 20, 8-8-8 guff.  

Again with the blue sky thinking...or havering pish depending on your POV

 

It’s based on the current standings and on the presumption of promotion/relegation still happening.

Personally, I’d prefer to see St Johnstone in with the 2 Dundee clubs & Raith in that East Division but that means dumping either Ross or Inverness or Inverness County FC!!!.

I’d also have Ayr Utd in there ahead of Dumbarton cuz then we have an almost guaranteed 10,000 gate 4 times a season in Ayrshire.

But, y’know…*shrugs*

 

North East League/Conference

North Division

Ross County

Inverness

Aberdeen

Dundee

Dundee Utd

 

East Division

St Johnstone

Falkirk

Hearts

Hibs

Dunfermline

 

South West League/Conference

South Division

Celtic

Rangers

Motherwell

Hamilton

Partick Thislte

 

West Division

Kilmarnock

St Mirren

Morton

QotS

Dumbarton

 

Maximizing derbies;

play teams in own division 4 times (16 games)

play teams in other division within conference 2 times H & A (10 games)

play teams in other conference once each H or A (10 games)

Total, 36 games before playoffs

Playoffs :

North East Championship– North Division champ vs East Division champion

South West Championship – South Division champ vs West Division champ

National Championship – NE champion vs South West Champion

 

Do we make the playoffs one-off games or H&A? More chance of an upset with a one-off but £££

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Two extra games v the same position in the other conference brings it up to 38 and gives a couple more "big" games during the regular season

I'd go with play-offs as one offs (with the highest ranked team given home advantage).  Less money but more of an advantage for the team who did best during the season.

Top four play off for the title, like you said.  The two losing semi finalists, four runners up and two best 3rd placed teams play off for the final Europa League spot.  

If each league was 6 teams, it'd sort out the north.  Hearts, Hibs, Falkirk, Dunfermline, Raith, Livingston would be a nice Eastern Division.  Ayr could join the west and maybe Airdrie the south??  Although fixtures would then be more awkward.

It's a nice thought that maybe one day such a thing would be suggested seriously, given how successful it is elsewhere.  And I think the localisation of the leagues would be a huge success in Scotland.  But why do that when we can watch Celtic and Rangers win the league every year until the world eventually ends and puts us out of our misery?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I would have 2 league's 12 in each

Western Division -
Rangers
Celtic
Ayr Utd
Motherwell
Patrick Thistle
Qos
Killie
St Mirren
Morton
Airdrie
Hamilton
Dumbarton

Eastern Division -
Aberdeen
Hearts
Hibs
Dundee Utd
Dundee
Falkirk
Livingston
Raith Rovers
Dunfermline
St Johnstone
Inverness
Ross County

Each team plays teams in their league twice and rival league once. 34 games. Top 4 from each league go into playoffs and play for title.

Key to this working is 100% revenue sharing to have a competitive league.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Or you could have 2 league's of 6

Western
Rangers
Celtic
Ayrshire
Lanarkshire
Renfrewshire
Dumfrieshire

Eastern
Hearts
Hibs
Aberdeen
Tayside
Fife
Stirlingshire

Each team plays teams in their league 4 times rival league 2 times. 34 games. Top 2 from each league go into playoffs and play for title.


Link to comment
Share on other sites

I would have 2 league's 12 in each

Western Division -
Rangers
Celtic
Ayr Utd
Motherwell
Patrick Thistle
Qos
Killie
St Mirren
Morton
Airdrie
Hamilton
Dumbarton

Eastern Division -
Aberdeen
Hearts
Hibs
Dundee Utd
Dundee
Falkirk
Livingston
Raith Rovers
Dunfermline
St Johnstone
Inverness
Ross County

Each team plays teams in their league twice and rival league once. 34 games. Top 4 from each league go into playoffs and play for title.

Key to this working is 100% revenue sharing to have a competitive league.



Very good so sky tv will have the west region being shown every week when one of the old firm are away from home. Yeah and they will agree to sharing

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 2017-6-6 at 14:28, TartanWarrior said:

Names are open to negotiation mate. The name Dundee United makes a lot of sense as we are literally uniting Dundee. I guess the Tayside Tigers is another option.

I chose the Border Reivers as that is a really cool name for a football team.

It didn't work for the short lived rugby team either.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 3 weeks later...

What talk about mergers does is ignores the current allegiances that people have.  Thus, an Eintracht Ayrshire team will never take off, as football fans in Ayrshire are very allied to the two current senior sides.  Irrespective of how well it does, they will not feel any great loyalty to it.  You would be relying on new fans to support the team.  I wonder how many ICT fans were regulars at either Caley or Thistle.  ICT ain't their team.

If QP merged, I wouldn't cross the street to watch the new side.

A regional side might work where there is no strong tradition of supporting teams already (rugby outwith the Borders being a good example)....but it didn't work in the Borders as people there actually went to support their local team. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Car crash of an idea, which would utterly destroy Scottish football.

That said, I do think mergers can work to create better and more successful club set ups and I think conservative tribalism can often stand in the way of ambition.

The biggest clubs in Denmark are results of mergers. FC Midtjylland, the merger of two rival clubs yoyoing between the top 2 divisions, eventually won the Superliga. Traditional clubs like FC Copenhagen and Brøndby were mergers back in the day too. Denmark's full of merger clubs. Successful and non-succesful mergers past and present all with the realisation that merging was the way to achieve success and the hope that the sum would end up more and better than its parts.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

17 hours ago, danejag said:

Car crash of an idea, which would utterly destroy Scottish football.

That said, I do think mergers can work to create better and more successful club set ups and I think conservative tribalism can often stand in the way of ambition.

The biggest clubs in Denmark are results of mergers. FC Midtjylland, the merger of two rival clubs yoyoing between the top 2 divisions, eventually won the Superliga. Traditional clubs like FC Copenhagen and Brøndby were mergers back in the day too. Denmark's full of merger clubs. Successful and non-succesful mergers past and present all with the realisation that merging was the way to achieve success and the hope that the sum would end up more and better than its parts.

 

Denmark only permitted professional football in the 1970s and professional clubs in 1978, prior to that the leagues were strictly amateur and the clubs more akin to our junior teams in that they represented districts of towns and cities; attendances were not impressive - when Aberdeen played BK 1903 (one of the constituent parts of FC Copenhagen) it was suggested the 1903 referred to their average attendance, not the year of formation. It made sense in the 80s and 90s to amalgamate resources and a whole new group of fans were created rather than die-hard fans having to "switch" allegiance. For example FC Copenhagen average around 16,000 compared to the combined 4,000 for the 2 combinees KB1903 and Copenhagen BK.

Combine the 2 Dundee clubs for example and you wouldn't get that effect at all.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

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