BuddyZero

Their clubs benefit financially on a huge scale for the level. An amateur player gritting their teeth and enduring a couple of matches against the most talented teenagers in the country (they might even enjoy the experience?) so their club can get 30 grand annoyance money seems a reasonable scenario in my opinion. If the youths are too good they are promoted and probably never seen again. If its a higher level and they don't get promoted, we're probably talking about 50k at that stage and the club gets that money the next season too. Maybe the pros wouldn't want to start at that level. Maybe they wouldn't want to pay the big fee. So they don't join it, and all the No To B Teams folk are poor but happy. Those are the terms in this hypothesis. We know the Old Firm want in, but they are only dictating terms because a high number of the Lowland League operators, as has been discussed previously and elsewhere, are short term spivs that want a quick buck for their fanless team regardless of what form it takes. It's a sellers market, so instead why don't the rest of the pyramid make the Old Firm a ridiculous offer they shouldn't accept? That would seem preferable to both the existing scenario of really no money at all circulating below the SPFL because locals in small towns contribute to a certain 2 clubs instead, and the recent fiasco of the insertion into the LL which really has been beneficial to nobody (apart from the minimal financial hit they have taken to get involved). They have the money and want in, but do they want in that badly? If so = £££. If not, status quo.

My point is starting at the bottom and having to work their way up would provide an air of respectibility to their introduction that elbowing their way in at tier 5 for a pittance does not.

I don't disagree with your sentiment, but the thing Scottish football in general could do with more of is money. This should be seen as a rare opportunity to separate the biggest teams from as much of their money as possible. If you don't think the hypothetical 200k per year would be a sufficient disincentive for more than a handful of teams, what higher fee would do the job? 500k? Maybe then even the old firm wouldn't sign up - so problem solved in terms of them coming in. I'd be happy for them have the option to join the pyramid but only if they want to pay a relative fortune - which would certainly be of an amount to be of significant, tangible benefit to the other clubs in that league. What we have currently is them being inserted as interlopers halfway up the pyramid for comparative pennies which benefits nobody. The only clubs with any money are Rangers and Celtic but the LL have undersold their product while damaging it. Although I'd question the suggestion that the LL ever had any integrity: the clubs that have been promoted out of it were either the existing big fish of the EOSFL or Juniors with some deep pockets, backing of a decent sized community and good organisation. The likes of East Kilbride have failed to capitalise on the opportunity, but managed to collaborate to shut the door on more worthy candidates via the very stingy relegation system.

I'm probably one of the few who is slightly more open minded about B teams overall BUT there should be integrity and incentive of an appropriate level to balance out the many negative aspects. If Rangers and Celtic want their kids in, it should be at West of Scotland D4, and paying 200k each. If they are promoted to D3, the fee rises by say 25% per level = 250k, and so on. They could be promoted and relegated like every other participant (but not to the Premiership obviously). Ideally there would be some kind of proviso that the cash to each real club is initially invested improving facilities etc so there is actually a material benefit to the football structure in the country. Something like 200k a year is pocket change to the old firm but more of an impediment to almost every other club so that would probably prevent an influx of Bs joining the system, but if some decide they want to stump up the cash and start at the bottom, is that not sort of fair enough? Definitely a whole lot better than parachuting into the LL for a pittance. In the end, yes there would probably be stockpiling by Celtic and Rangers and it would benefit them more than others - but the never-ending two horse race has been firmly re-established anyway, and this way at least they would be putting more money into the game at lower levels. And if the likes of Hamilton want to splure all their money to the WOSFL in the hope of developing another Mccarthy and McArthur via Accies B getting horsed by Glenafton, Glencairn and Gartcairn, that's their judgement call. I think it could have positives, but the main consideration is for the relevant bodies to have the will not to bend over for the big clubs but take them to the cleaners financially for the privilege, and make them work their way up so at least one can say they have done the work and deserve to be at whatever level they reach.

Not sure if anyone has brought this up already, but there is still the matter of tests / H&S at Lesser. Definitely there will be an effort to swap as many home fixtures to away as possible, but I would reckon any at Lesser will be behind closed doors. I could see a motivated, quick-moving and diligent organisation getting something put in place for the 600+Royal Box by the start of the season, but I don't see this regime being sufficiently blessed in any of those departments to make it happen.

Here's hoping. It won't be 2 stands. 600 in East + 400 away in South gazebo while North is developed over the season (which might go quicker if housebuilders with better supply lines and project management skills are involved) would be reasonable. Given the way it's gone so far, though, even that seems wildly optimistic

https://twitter.com/MyreMedia/status/1665449705097109509?t=7HgZ_sedzjaOSziJfoo36Q&s=19 Aerial photo of Lesser from 3 days ago. Looks suspiciously like the South end is not being developed at all! Or has it been tidied in preparation for the erection of a temporary stand for the new season (according to others with better knowledge, doesn't seem to be any planning applications for that...)?

I'm actually a bit disappointed that there was never a team in those parts consisting entirely of J. McMullans and W. Westwaters, I think they could have made it happen

Dunno if this is any help, it's likely you've already seen it - may be quite inaccurate but sometimes these sort of things includes a family account that clears up some inaccuracies. It basically states that Alan Westwater's father played only for Dunipace til 1952, then Kilsyth Rangers until emigrating in 1956. So that would mean that all the SFL appearances were by the other Willie,but maybe they just aren't aware of the wartime Dundee stuff... https://kilsythrangersfc.webs.com/tributetowilliewestwater.htm

5 rows, no standing areas and not even the full length of the pitch; I know the space is restricted (not exactly touching the end of big Hampden mind you) but surely this has to be among the most unambitious structures ever implemented from scratch by a professional sports club to house spectators - as well as taking one of the longest periods to build (my understanding is it's STILL not quite ready?). The Royal Box AKA Haugheys Folly is an absolute disgrace of course, not no mention an architectural eyesore (the grotesque love child of a rural bus stop and Anderson shelter, contrasting sharply with the adjacent McAlpine building which is very smart IMO) but it would be mitigated slightly if this stand and the proposed ends were in any way sufficient for even a modest third-tier club, which was the minimum target in going professional. Despite making it seem like a Herculean task from which a facility of great splendour would eventually appear, justifying the disruption and making it all worthwhile, the end product is so underwhelming. The bare minimum in almost every aspect (the pitch itself looks nice). And the attitude displayed by the committee in committee in communications relating to this, Ochilview and the Conference League is disgusting. How is it even possible to get it so spectacularly wrong at all times.

Was talking to a guy I vaguely know this morning who always seems pretty clued up on a shop floor level (think he is ex Junior, son plays in LL) and he brought up the Conference and was of the conviction that it would be coming in, but just in 24/25 rather than 23/24, anyone any info about that eventuality?

Clearly the stable door and horse scenario is well underway with the B teams, but surely the least that should be expected from the LL clubs is to wring the maximum revenue from this cash cow, sorry bolting horse, sorry donkey's ass, whatever. 200k per club per season sounds about right to me (maybe higher?) something big enough to be of tangible benefit to the clubs, and to be too much for most to throw at it and stem applicant numbers from becoming unmanageable (there seems to be no other obstacles to anyone in the SPFL entering). In an ideal world I would like to see HFL/South East/South West for a far more accurate distribution across the country of clubs with a structure and ambition to play at that level and above - each with an inevitable couple of Bs in each but providing a useful income source as above, with the top 2 in each (discounting Bs) playing off along with bottom 2 in League 2, 2 x mini groups (H+A), winners of each go/stay up and the others at least get a bit of revenue from the 3 matches. At the other end, 3 down to WOSFL / EOSFL / MID+CAL+NJ level. Every time there's a vote and the closed shop status quo is maintained while selling out a bit more at the expense of their self respect, a wee piece of my soul dies. And I don't even have a team at this level.

Here's a couple I took skulking about at the end of Feb. Apologies for disrupting the timeline. No big insights but went up the hill at the back of Mount Annan Drive so maybe a view that isn't seen as much

Agree, but let's be honest, feck those guys. I won't deny that this theoretical setup is meant to be something that clings to reality in terms of having similarities to the current shambles and providing concessions to it, but is basically meant to sidestep the LL and give opportunities to the Tier 6 and below that are currently getting absolutely shafted by this pyramid with bottlenecks. I know the West Juniors maybe held out too long before coming across but their quantity and quality should have led to an intervention by this point, and removing them from the bloated structure would allow the remaining East to become a fairer representation of the old East Juniors and EoS which is a pretty decent group. Some will probably have insight that pees on this view but I think the 3 regions for Juniors was a good divide, obviously the North was weak but then we have the Highlands to even that up, and the West was stronger than the East but a few of the EoS can and do hold their own. That setup seems so obviously superior to the LL mess to me (and could even better withstand a few colts getting chucked in with some compensatory cash - as I said, much more than the pittance currently being deemed acceptable) that it's a damn shame that nobody higher up this magical pyramid appears to have the will or the way to say 'actually guys yous are making a complete arse of this, you've shown yourself to be selfish and incompetent we're changing it to this for the benefit of more than 5 clubs with 5 fans.'

Not sure exactly how they do it in other countries but there seems to be a lot more flexibility and adaptability about league systems every so often, you see it across the continent. The voting system we have here appears to be good democracy at first glance but stifles all but the most meagre alterations at the slowest pace imaginable, with all parties not surprisingly choosing the option of whatever benefits them the most in the short term, which is usually the status quo. Proper democracies function not only with a fair share of voting but with limited terms of office. You're right that agreements are required to change these setups, but the agreements that are made are so obstructive to progress that there's barely any point trying to improve anything. I don't know what the ideal system should be but the behaviour of the LL clubs and the seniors in the past indicates letting the clubs themselves wield the power is a recipe for only self interest, carve-ups, closed shops and staleness.