Sergeant Wilson Posted February 17, 2016 Share Posted February 17, 2016 It will never happen because, well, the SFA/SPFL are arseholes, but: Summer football. Two senior divisions. 16-team top division. Play each other home and away. 30 games. Bottom two relegated, third bottom to play off v third placed in second tier. 16-team second tier. As above, with third bottom to play off v winner of regional division play-off. Division One East, Division One West, Division Two East, Division Two West, etc., etc. I'm glad we seem to have got rid of those Northern diddies. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WILLIEA Posted February 17, 2016 Share Posted February 17, 2016 It will never happen because, well, it's a really stupid idea but: Summer football. Two senior divisions. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DA Baracus Posted February 17, 2016 Share Posted February 17, 2016 It should never happen because it would be absolutely dreadful. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WILLIEA Posted February 17, 2016 Share Posted February 17, 2016 You might think it's stupid, but it's the system that produced Malmö, who have pumped both Rangers and Celtic out of the CL in recent seasons. And what would you attempt to extrapolate from this limited, and in one case out of date information? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jacksgranda Posted February 17, 2016 Share Posted February 17, 2016 And what would you attempt to extrapolate from this limited, and in one case out of date information? That Scotland could produce a team that would pump both Celtic and Rangers out of the CL? Although not in the same season, obviously. And only if we had 2 CL spots, although that would probably be guaranteed if we went down the summer football and two senior divisions route. Throw in League Cup sectional ties (played in America, Canada, Australia, New Zealand and the Isle of Man) for good measure, and Bob's your uncle. Quite what we do with all the senior teams we currently have who will no longer be senior under this two senior divisions cunning plan, I don't know. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BFTD Posted February 17, 2016 Share Posted February 17, 2016 Quite what we do with all the senior teams we currently have who will no longer be senior under this two senior divisions cunning plan, I don't know. Why, their fans and resources would be reallocated to the remaining teams. No way they'd want to continue without the nice SPFL logo on their letterheads. That seems to be the bizarre thinking from folk who like this idea, at least. Not a scooby what other difference they think it would make. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
effeffsee_the2nd Posted February 17, 2016 Share Posted February 17, 2016 Would you stop supporting alloa if they were relegated to a regional division? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BFTD Posted February 18, 2016 Share Posted February 18, 2016 Would you stop supporting alloa if they were relegated to a regional division? God no. Nobody would. That's why I don't understand the thinking behind these strange ideas to kick sides out of the SPFL - some folk seem to think there's a really obvious, major benefit to the remaining clubs, but I've never seen it explained. I can only assume the hope would be that the relegated clubs would go to the wall and their fans would choose another SPFL club to support, which anyone familiar with football would know will never happen; people would just start up a new club at a lower level to replace the old, or drift out of the game altogether. I can't imagine any fans in, say, Central Scotland voting for straight regionalisation either. Cutting the country in half does little or nothing for travelling distance, as someone on here worked out a while back, and slicing the country down into further small regions would become duller than the current state of affairs. No league limits itself to a single region for reasons of entertainment. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SpoonTon Posted February 18, 2016 Share Posted February 18, 2016 God no. Nobody would. That's why I don't understand the thinking behind these strange ideas to kick sides out of the SPFL - some folk seem to think there's a really obvious, major benefit to the remaining clubs, but I've never seen it explained. I can only assume the hope would be that the relegated clubs would go to the wall and their fans would choose another SPFL club to support, which anyone familiar with football would know will never happen; people would just start up a new club at a lower level to replace the old, or drift out of the game altogether. I can't imagine any fans in, say, Central Scotland voting for straight regionalisation either. Cutting the country in half does little or nothing for travelling distance, as someone on here worked out a while back, and slicing the country down into further small regions would become duller than the current state of affairs. No league limits itself to a single region for reasons of entertainment. The potential benefits exist in the way in which funding mighr be shifted. League Two clubs currently receive a share of around £500k each season. There are many ways such funds could be redistributed, but that's one of the benefits. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WILLIEA Posted February 18, 2016 Share Posted February 18, 2016 That Scotland could produce a team that would pump both Celtic and Rangers out of the CL? Although not in the same season, obviously. And only if we had 2 CL spots, although that would probably be guaranteed if we went down the summer football and two senior divisions route. Throw in League Cup sectional ties (played in America, Canada, Australia, New Zealand and the Isle of Man) for good measure, and Bob's your uncle. Quite what we do with all the senior teams we currently have who will no longer be senior under this two senior divisions cunning plan, I don't know. Ah! I see. Now that it's been explained sounds like #baller utopia. Haud me back 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BFTD Posted February 18, 2016 Share Posted February 18, 2016 The potential benefits exist in the way in which funding mighr be shifted. League Two clubs currently receive a share of around £500k each season. There are many ways such funds could be redistributed, but that's one of the benefits. So the remaining 32 clubs could receive as much as £15,000 in exchange for cutting the bottom ten adrift? If only I'd seen this explained earlier 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SpoonTon Posted February 18, 2016 Share Posted February 18, 2016 So the remaining 32 clubs could receive as much as £15,000 in exchange for cutting the bottom ten adrift? If only I'd seen this explained earlier Redistributing £500k over a larger number of clubs at the top levels of the pyramid would help clubs develop. Alternatively, more funding for the the current League One clubs would help them compete at the second tier in a 16/16 system. That can be the type of thinking involved in decreasing the numbers. I think there's a positive discussion to be had about how best to use the resources available to help the whole game. I don't think it's wrong to explore whether or not funding is best used to support the current structure, or if there might be a better way to structure things. That doesn't necessarily mean we should have less clubs playing in national leagues, but I think there is a discussion to be had. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BFTD Posted February 18, 2016 Share Posted February 18, 2016 Aye...call me a cynic, but I'm thinking that fifteen grand would be a best-case scenario for League One clubs. If the SPFL was moving down the route of discarding wee clubs to raise more money for bigger clubs, then it wouldn't be long before the bigger, bigger clubs started claiming that small amount would be better used by teams with superior facilities for youth development. Coincidentally, there'd be fewer wee clubs to try and block moves like that, too. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SpoonTon Posted February 18, 2016 Share Posted February 18, 2016 Aye...call me a cynic, but I'm thinking that fifteen grand would be a best-case scenario for League One clubs. If the SPFL was moving down the route of discarding wee clubs to raise more money for bigger clubs, then it wouldn't be long before the bigger, bigger clubs started claiming that small amount would be better used by teams with superior facilities for youth development. Coincidentally, there'd be fewer wee clubs to try and block moves like that, too. Absolutely. If that kind of deal was on the table I'd be against it. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
effeffsee_the2nd Posted February 18, 2016 Share Posted February 18, 2016 Never mind the money for a min. Plenty of teams play in regional leagues and dont go to the wall. Should you be relegated you will have the opertunity to win promotion. I dont see why we have to stick rigidly to the number 42. I dont see why smaller clubs think that regional = death . Many are similar in size support and abilty as the bigger junior teams 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SpoonTon Posted February 18, 2016 Share Posted February 18, 2016 The other obvious advantage of reducing the numbers is making the pyramid set-up more appealing to the likes of the Junior teams. The numbers wouldn't necessarily have to be reduced, but I've always thought that 3 national tiers would be the limit in this regard. There is very little appeal in League Two for many currently outside of the set-up. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BFTD Posted February 18, 2016 Share Posted February 18, 2016 Never mind the money for a min. Plenty of teams play in regional leagues and dont go to the wall. Should you be relegated you will have the opertunity to win promotion. I dont see why we have to stick rigidly to the number 42. I dont see why smaller clubs think that regional = death . Many are similar in size support and abilty as the bigger junior teams I don't think they would at all; that was just all I could think for why bigger clubs would be so keen to get rid. If it's just for the potential of an extra ten-to-twenty grand a year, then fair enough; I guess people have been killed over less. As for sticking to 42, there is no reason, as we've expanded a couple of times in recent memory. I'd like to think there would be more of a reason for expelling teams than just "f**k 'em, we got ours", however. The other obvious advantage of reducing the numbers is making the pyramid set-up more appealing to the likes of the Junior teams. The numbers wouldn't necessarily have to be reduced, but I've always thought that 3 national tiers would be the limit in this regard. There is very little appeal in League Two for many currently outside of the set-up. Elaborate, sir. I'd have thought greater promotion/relegation to and from League Two would work better than dumping another layer down a level, as presumably the Junior clubs would still have to work their way past those sides to get into the SPFL anyway. I'd imagine that eventually we'll see the Highland/Lowland champions coming straight up anyway, with maybe a play-off situation similar to the current one between the clubs underneath and the third-worst SPFL side. Probably not for twenty or thirty years, but I'd have thought that's the long-term aim for the pyramid system. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SpoonTon Posted February 18, 2016 Share Posted February 18, 2016 Elaborate, sir. I'd have thought greater promotion/relegation to and from League Two would work better than dumping another layer down a level, as presumably the Junior clubs would still have to work their way past those sides to get into the SPFL anyway. I'd imagine that eventually we'll see the Highland/Lowland champions coming straight up anyway, with maybe a play-off situation similar to the current one between the clubs underneath and the third-worst SPFL side. Probably not for twenty or thirty years, but I'd have thought that's the long-term aim for the pyramid system. For clubs used to regional football, 2 trips to Annan at one end or Elgin at the other isn't a great incentive. Especially when it's only the fourth national tier. I'm sure they'd rather compete with some of the clubs at a regional level with a more enticing prize at the end of it. Look at Brora last year - they didn't want promotion. Would they have felt the same if it was a second tier league of 16? Not a chance. It seems to me that they'd actually prefer a greater battle for promotion with a greater prize at the end. No-one feels motivated by a prize that they don't want. Of course, we're a long long way from something like that. There would be many other elements needed to make it work. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
EdTheDuck Posted February 18, 2016 Share Posted February 18, 2016 (edited) You might think it's stupid, but it's the system that produced Malmö, who have pumped both Rangers and Celtic out of the CL in recent seasons. If you genuinely believe the league set-up is what creates better players/teams we should follow the Swiss example surely? Top two divisions of 10 and then a 16. The Swiss are nearer to Scotland in population than Sweden and they're miles ahead of the Swedish in club ranking (and have 2 UCL places) and in the FIFA rankings. So there we have it, two divisions of 10 and we'll be as good as Switzerland in no time. Edited February 18, 2016 by EdTheDuck 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BFTD Posted February 18, 2016 Share Posted February 18, 2016 For clubs used to regional football, 2 trips to Annan at one end or Elgin at the other isn't a great incentive. Especially when it's only the fourth national tier. I'm sure they'd rather compete with some of the clubs at a regional level with a more enticing prize at the end of it. Look at Brora last year - they didn't want promotion. Would they have felt the same if it was a second tier league of 16? Not a chance. It seems to me that they'd actually prefer a greater battle for promotion with a greater prize at the end. No-one feels motivated by a prize that they don't want. Of course, we're a long long way from something like that. There would be many other elements needed to make it work. For a moment, I thought you were doing a Brookes Mileson and saying that Brora should be parachuted directly into League One My bad. They'd still be having to work their way past these teams anyway, so I really don't see what kind of difference that makes. The same 'prize' is still there at the end of it. f**k Brora, as they'll end up going down the same route as Gretna eventually anyway, but their reticence towards promotion didn't seem to be coming from having to play Montrose and East Stirlingshire for a season, but was more to do with the board enjoying their time as a big fish in a small pond. Possibly taking a year less to travel towards being walloped by Raith, Morton, and St Mirren doesn't seem like any kind of incentive to a club that thinks along those lines. Have any other Highland/Lowland sides expressed displeasure at the thought of rubbing shoulders with Clyde on their way to potential glory? Well, more so than everyone else 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.