League reconstruction: Let's hear your view

[Gordon EF]

1 hour ago, RabidAI said:

Less miles = less money on petrol, presumably?

There are lots of ideas that would see clubs spending less money that are shite ideas. Apart from that, it's been said again and again that for 75% of the clubs in L1/2, regionalisation would either save very little money or actually cost them more.

[St-ow!]

2 hours ago, anonanist said:

This idea looks familiar! 

Things to consider are:

Top 16 - the winners of the middle section will qualify for at least a play off for Europe with 4th, but what happens when our co-efficient drops again and we only have four European places?

Second tier - we usually have about 22 full time clubs, of which only 6 would be left at this level; you might need quite open promotion/relegation with Premiership to keep them in business.

Also, a 12-team Championship would be better if you want a larger League One.

Third tier - probably two automatic promotion places and promotion play offs required to keep the bigger division intereting; maybe 3, 4 and 5 in play offs with 10th in the Championship (if the Championship had 12 teams).

Automatic promotion for pyramid play off winners should be possible with a larger League One/SPFL.

The regional conferences you mention have some merits, but might end up generating too much uncertainty each and every season; just go for 18 or 20 teams playing home and away.

Don't we always have five European places when Rangers and Celtic are both in the top league? The middle section should work unless one of them goes bust.

12 teams in the Championship would be fine. Split at 33 games to give promotion/relegation groups of 6 and maybe keeps full-timers x4 against eachother in the top section.

I like the 3 regional conferences below that for their fixtures, as more local away support ers and less travel, as a go-between for clubs transitioning between regional and national leagues.

[Marten]

16 minutes ago, Gordon EF said:

There are lots of ideas that would see clubs spending less money that are shite ideas. Apart from that, it's been said again and again that for 75% of the clubs in L1/2, regionalisation would either save very little money or actually cost them more.

Of clubs at SPFL level, travel will not be as large a proportion of their costs as some people think it is. There are only a few outliers. And to take one of those: Elgin won't exactly earn more money in a north leage v Formartine compared to in a national league v Queen's Park.

At a lower level, travel costs have far more impact. It would be absolutely unsustainable to have a game like Newton Stewart v Scourie for example.

[St-ow!]

1 hour ago, Cyclizine said:

Exactly. We see a constant argument that regionalisation will increase crowds, when the opposite experience is true.

The logical conclusion is that we should go back to the days of Germany pre mid 60s and regionalise at the top level and the champions of the regional leagues can play off for the title.

That sounds fine to me. Have West and East top levels before Xmas, then the best 4 of each come together in a national Premiership after Xmas, play home and away to decide title, European places etc. Would give x4 Old Firm games as 2 would be in the West Premier, and a 14 game each finale would give someone else a better chance of being champions.

14 hours ago, Classick said:

That's a good solution! A similar system was used recently in Argentina playing  the additional match against the main rival team. 

I'd choose a system to give 4 OF games (derbies or seeding based on the last table).

 

1 hour ago, RabidAI said:

Sounds decent. Three divisions of 14 then? Or 18 teams in the bottom division, to bring more through from the LL, HL?

You're not seriously proposing a league without any splits in it? Shame on you.

[Andy groundhopper]

Seeing as there's a 'no split' proposal on the table, I'll go for something ridiculous now ! The OF play each other all season ,as I expect most fans find them tedious and boring. The winner of that mini league plays the top 3 in the SPL to work out the champions. The OF naturally give a cash handout to all clubs to compensate for lost earnings. 

[anonanist]

19 hours ago, Marten said:

Of clubs at SPFL level, travel will not be as large a proportion of their costs as some people think it is. There are only a few outliers. And to take one of those: Elgin won't exactly earn more money in a north leage v Formartine compared to in a national league v Queen's Park.

At a lower level, travel costs have far more impact. It would be absolutely unsustainable to have a game like Newton Stewart v Scourie for example.

That sounds reasonable; looking at it from the base upwards is probably most people's first-hand experience of football, where travel costs rule out anything but local matches for league, occasional cup away days being the exciting exception.

My view has been that League Two doesn't have too many big part-time clubs, so you might want to merge it with the Lowland League and have a LL East and a LL West, with Elgin going back to the Highland League (although I take your point there, I was thinking of what may be best for he majority of clubs at that level).

My question is, since there are no fans at these games now, are travel costs no longer offset by revenues, changing the proportions in the equation for clubs and so making it unsustainable for many more clubs, along the lines of the example you gave but at a higher level, to continue with current league structures?

[anonanist]

11 hours ago, Andy groundhopper said:

Seeing as there's a 'no split' proposal on the table, I'll go for something ridiculous now ! The OF play each other all season ,as I expect most fans find them tedious and boring. The winner of that mini league plays the top 3 in the SPL to work out the champions. The OF naturally give a cash handout to all clubs to compensate for lost earnings. 

Or a top league of 8, play each team x4 (28 games), play an 8-team Championship x1 (8 games, 36 in total).

[RabidAI]

12 hours ago, Andy groundhopper said:

Seeing as there's a 'no split' proposal on the table, I'll go for something ridiculous now ! The OF play each other all season ,as I expect most fans find them tedious and boring. The winner of that mini league plays the top 3 in the SPL to work out the champions. The OF naturally give a cash handout to all clubs to compensate for lost earnings. 

 

1 hour ago, anonanist said:

Or a top league of 8, play each team x4 (28 games), and play an 8-team Championship x1 (8 games, 36 in total).

...other unusual proposals are...

On 17/08/2020 at 16:00, prodcast said:

The main issue with this proposal, for me, was that the middle 8 would have points reset to zero after 22 games, which would be unfair on those doing better in the earlier part of the season and would see some teams with not much to play for if they qualified early for the middle 8.

I would address this by awarding starting points before the middle 8 begins based on pre-split league position.

You would normally expect 11th in Prem and 2nd in Champ to play off, so they'd need to begin on the same points; you wouldn't expect 4th in Ch to be promoted, so they'd begin on zero.

So I'd start the middle 8 with points pre-allocated as follows:

1 - 12pts (for team 9th in Prem)

2 - 10pts (team 1st from Cham)

3 - 8pts (for 10th Prem)

4 - 6pts (for 2nd Champ)

5 - 6pts (for 11th Prem)

6 - 4pts (for 3rd Champ)

7 - 2pts (for 12th Prem)

8 - 0pts (for 4th Champ)

...which was for the top two leagues of 12, dividing into three divisions of 8; and, on the full east-west split...

On 18/08/2020 at 12:13, prodcast said:

22 games - absolutely. Less is more.

I'd regionalised from the top, though, with a 12-team East Premiership and a 12-team West Premiership, playing just 22 games per team as you say, then a winter break.

After the winter shutdown, the top 4 from each of the two regional Premierships would go forward to the National Premiership, playing eachother home and away to settle the European places and crown Scottish Champions (36-game season, in total).

The 8 teams remaining in each regional Premiership would play each other again, home and away, to avoid relegation (36-game season, in total) -

with the top East and top West teams at the season's end playing off against the National team who is sitting in the final European place, winners taking that European place.

Or, the remaining 8 teams in the East could play the remaining 8 teams in the West at home and away to complete a 38-game season, points being added ongoing to their early season tally, with the same European incentive and relegation disincentive as before.

 

Edited to add - it would be interesting to see separate West and East of Scotland cups, including all the biggest clubs, too.

 

[RabidAI]

On 31/08/2020 at 20:21, Classick said:

I think 14 teams is the ideal number for Scottish Premier, so I'd go with 14 teams. 

I dislike splits, but 26 matches would be not enough and playing each team three times would bring to 39 matches, which is ok, but there is an issue who would play the third game at home. The only solution would be a split and I'd go with top 7 and bottom 7. This would solve  home/away games madness, 19 home games for each team and would keep four Old Firm derbies. The main drawback is that after the split each team would have two free weekends and that would extend the season to 40 weeks rather than the current 38. Anyway a  week off  might help ease the strain on squads, especially on those playing european cups.

Below Premier  two more divisions of 14 (14-14-14 system), but other possibilities could be considered, like 14-10-18  system. More than 3 national leagues would be useless.

Below senior football : 3 regional leagues (North, East, West) which fits well the number of teams in each part of Scotland

 

On 01/09/2020 at 08:30, Stag Nation said:

It's not the only solution.

Play 39 games, then a 40th to even out homes and aways. The additional round could be seeded, or local derbies (both would potentially give 4 OF games), or simply drawn at random.

 

On 02/09/2020 at 15:38, RabidAI said:

Good solution.

Another possibility would be to reverse the fixtures the following season and, similarly, just accept the inequalities - as we do now with the post-split fixtures. In that scenario, newly promoted teams could replace the relegated teams in the Premiership's reversed fixtures schedule. And the Old Firm could play their third match at Hampden.

 

On 11/09/2020 at 20:34, Classick said:

That's a good solution! A similar system was used recently in Argentina playing  the additional match against the main rival team. 

I'd choose a system to give 4 OF games (derbies or seeding based on the last table).

...but this sounds more promising.

Edited September 13, 2020 by RabidAI
To highlight the key parts.

[Gordon EF]

On a different topic. How would folk like to see promotion / relegation at the bottom of the SPFL?

I'd like to see the bottom club go straight down with the winner of a one-off LL / HL play-off played at a neutral ground replacing them.

I'd like to then see a 4-way play off between:

• Second bottom of the SPFL
• Loser of the HL/LL champions play-off
• 2nd place in HL
• 2nd place in LL

So for a hypothetical completed 2019/20:

• Brechin City get relegated
• Brora Rangers vs Kelty Hearts champions play off at McDairmid Park (say Kelty win and are promoted).
• Then play-offs follwing L1 and Champioship format with semi-finals: Brora Rangers vs Bonnyrigg Rose & Albion Rovers vs Fraserburgh

Edited September 15, 2020 by Gordon EF

[St-ow!]

1 hour ago, Gordon EF said:

On a different topic. How would folk like to see promotion / relegation at the bottom of the SPFL?

I'd like to see the bottom club go straight down with the winner of a one-off LL / HL play-off played at a neutral ground replacing them.

I'd like to then see a 4-way play off between:

• Second bottom of the SPFL
• Loser of the HL/LL champions play-off
• 2nd place in HL
• 2nd place in LL

So for a hypothetical completed 2019/20:

• Brechin City get relegated
• Brora Rangers vs Kelty Hearts champions play off at McDairmid Park (say Kelty win and are promoted).
• Then play-offs follwing L1 and Champioship format with semi-finals: Brora Rangers vs Bonnyrigg Rose & Albion Rovers vs Fraserburgh

A step in the right direction, yep. SPFL clubs might not agree to it without expanding the league first. Maybe 12-12-20 with 2 automatic promotion/relegation between Championship and League One and play offs between 3, 4, 5 in L1 and 10 in Championship.

[Gordon EF]

2 minutes ago, St-ow! said:

A step in the right direction, yep. SPFL clubs might not agree to it without expanding the league first. Maybe 12-12-20 with 2 automatic promotion/relegation between Championship and League One and play offs between 3, 4, 5 in L1 and 10 in Championship.

Aye, there would definitely have to be something in it for them aside from making it easier to get back up if they ever get relegated.

[St-ow!]

On 13/09/2020 at 07:35, anonanist said:

That sounds reasonable; looking at it from the base upwards is probably most people's first-hand experience of football, where travel costs rule out anything but local matches for league, occasional cup away days being the exciting exception.

My view has been that League Two doesn't have too many big part-time clubs, so you might want to merge it with the Lowland League and have a LL East and a LL West, with Elgin going back to the Highland League (although I take your point there, I was thinking of what may be best for he majority of clubs at that level).

My question is, since there are no fans at these games now, are travel costs no longer offset by revenues, changing the proportions in the equation for clubs and so making it unsustainable for many more clubs, along the lines of the example you gave but at a higher level, to continue with current league structures?

Good points. Depends how long Covid lasts, maybe hang tough for now as it may not be a permanent change in the balance of finances. The LL catchment sort of caters for the smaller part time clubs you mention.

[prodcast]

2 hours ago, Gordon EF said:

On a different topic. How would folk like to see promotion / relegation at the bottom of the SPFL?

I'd like to see the bottom club go straight down with the winner of a one-off LL / HL play-off played at a neutral ground replacing them.

I'd like to then see a 4-way play off between:

• Second bottom of the SPFL
• Loser of the HL/LL champions play-off
• 2nd place in HL
• 2nd place in LL

So for a hypothetical completed 2019/20:

• Brechin City get relegated
• Brora Rangers vs Kelty Hearts champions play off at McDairmid Park (say Kelty win and are promoted).
• Then play-offs follwing L1 and Champioship format with semi-finals: Brora Rangers vs Bonnyrigg Rose & Albion Rovers vs Fraserburgh

I like the idea.

I've been hoping for something like this and thought the creation of the Lowland League was supposed to be just the first step towards something much more open between the League and non-league - but more promotion and relegation has never materialised.

Do Berwick and East Stirlingshire not talk to their former chums in SPFL2? More play-off places makes the lower league more exciting (the LL and HL could do that part themselves, right now - e.g. HL 1st v LL 2nd, LL 1st v HL 2nd, winners play off) and gives relegated clubs a much better chance to regain League status. Maybe it'll have to happen to a couple more of them before things are sorted for the better; automatic relegation for the worst in the League and automatic promotion for the best non-leaguers seems just.

(Unless they're actually quite chuffed at the change of scene, and looking forward to meeting new clubs coming through; but opening up the leagues enables more of this, too, so even 12-12-10-10 would be more interesting than at present.)

Edited September 15, 2020 by prodcast
Words added.

[Gordon EF]

3 minutes ago, prodcast said:

I like the idea.

I've been hoping for something like this and thought the creation of the Lowland League was supposed to be just the first step towards something much more open between the League and non-league - but more promotion and relegation has never materialised.

Do Berwick and East Stirlingshire not talk to their former chums in SPFL2? More play-off places makes the lower league more exciting (the LL and HL could do that part themselves, right now) and gives relegated clubs a much better chance to regain League status. Maybe it'll have to happen to a couple more of them before things are sorted for the better; automatic relegation for the worst in the League and automatic promotion for the best non-leaguers seems just.

My feeling is that because only Shire and an unbelievably god-awful Berwick teams have gone down, all but a couple of SPFL clubs still believe there's no immediate danger to them. "Someone might get relegated this season, but it won't be us".

I don't imagine Brechin thought they were in serious danger at the beginning of last season. Ask them in Feb 2020 and maybe they'll have a different view of opening up promotion spots at tier 5.

[Stag Nation]

2 hours ago, Gordon EF said:

On a different topic. How would folk like to see promotion / relegation at the bottom of the SPFL?

I'd like to see the bottom club go straight down with the winner of a one-off LL / HL play-off played at a neutral ground replacing them.

I'd like to then see a 4-way play off between:

• Second bottom of the SPFL
• Loser of the HL/LL champions play-off
• 2nd place in HL
• 2nd place in LL

So for a hypothetical completed 2019/20:

• Brechin City get relegated
• Brora Rangers vs Kelty Hearts champions play off at McDairmid Park (say Kelty win and are promoted).
• Then play-offs follwing L1 and Champioship format with semi-finals: Brora Rangers vs Bonnyrigg Rose & Albion Rovers vs Fraserburgh

South of Scotland League?

[Gordon EF]

8 minutes ago, Stag Nation said:

South of Scotland League?

They're tier 6, below the LL.

[Oldster]

On 11/09/2020 at 11:54, no-brainer said:

I think a larger tier 2 is desirable to help big part-time clubs transition to full-time football: the additional finance from consistently playing alongside full-time clubs with their larger travelling supports should help.

I take it having more full-time clubs is desirable to the game in order to help develop youngsters.

If they could go to 14 teams at the top 2 levels and 18 teams below that in a national conference I'd be happy. I fear the virus will stop most leagues from beginning and the premier will have to be void. Then they could restructure but it didn't work last time. Then a vaccine will allow a normal season in 2021.

Edited September 16, 2020 by Oldster
Forgot something

[St-ow!]

For a complete restructure then a 16 team Premiership looks good, but the other contributors were talking about smaller steps that had more chance of being accepted. Mind you, you're adding 4 teams to the league there so that has to be more appealing to clubs not keen on relegation to non-league football.

If the season is cancelled, and with a vaccine due in January, maybe a summer season would be necessary for finances and also do-able in practice.

[Andy groundhopper]

Wouldn't bank on the spfl voting for anything, look how long it took down south with the National League going into the EFL. Mention 2 relegated and clubs will demand that 2 go up, just to improve their chances, and not being out in the  wilderness. 2 up 2 down and no play offs, simple.