League reconstruction: Let's hear your view

[ahemps]

4 minutes ago, Gordon EF said:

Yeah, I can't think of any that are as bad as ours. Just couldn't be sure the same team hasn't won the Kyrgyzstani league like 50 times in a row or something.

Possibly but then if that is where you are looking for comparison is that not a sign of how poor the discussion is?

I can imagine telling an OF fan that the Scottish league is so weighted in their favour that the league is basically non competitive and they reply with, 'aye but what about that Azerbaijan league'.

The OF think that '55' or '10 in a row' is a sign of their entitled dominance. To me they are a sign of how incredibly weak the competitiveness of the league is.

[DiegoDiego]

I think every single league is. There is not another league in Europe that has had the same 2 winners for the last 36yrs. Scotland also has the most financial disadvantaged league in Europe, only Portugal comes close to the gulf in finances between the top 2 or 3 teams and the rest. 
Genuine competition is where the winner is not known and is up for debate. I can guarantee in 10yrs time the winner of the SPFL will be Celtic or Rangers.
Money is the biggest factor in football these days, the only discussion that should come to the table in league reconstruction is something that has a fairer distribution of money.

Like any right minded individual I'd love to see someone new win the Premiership, but I'm not sure I'd trade that if it meant creating an environment like some of the countries with a more varied distribution of winners.

A lot of countries of similar size to us have clubs winning championships after doing a Gretna, but instead of a "lovable" Matalan version of Nick Cage in Leaving Las Vegas, it's run by some puppet controlled by criminal organisations using the club to launder money with a spot of match fixing on the side.

Or you get a situation like Denmark where literally every other club in the top two leagues is some ICT-esque Frankenclub.

We've made our own bed in Scotland, but we're renting the flat from UEFA and until Champions League money is rejigged we're playing in a perpetual motion machine where the cheeks will continue to pull away. The Old Firm have just shown us they've no issue with redistributing cash to the lower levels as it makes as much difference as Richard Branson telling the barman to keep the change.

[ahemps]

2 hours ago, DiegoDiego said:

Or you get a situation like Denmark where literally every other club in the top two leagues is some ICT-esque Frankenclub.

It would be interesting to see what the fans of Midtjylland think? The 2 teams that merged had 3 Danish cup final appearances between them but neither had ever been in the Danish top league. Now they are winning league titles and playing champions league football. 

Has the Inverness merger not been a success???? Two teams who played highland league football or 1 who is now a semi regular top flight team with a Scottish cup win in their short history. What is the consensus amongst their fans? 

I know it is not a popular opinion but I am not appalled at the idea of clubs merging, Aberdeen and Motherwell were both formed that way, they are the only ones I know of but I'm sure there will have been a few more.

[Arch Stanton]

17 minutes ago, ahemps said:

I know it is not a popular opinion but I am not appalled at the idea of clubs merging, Aberdeen and Motherwell were both formed that way, they are the only ones I know of but I'm sure there will have been a few more.

Ayr United (from Ayr FC and Ayr Parkhouse).

[DiegoDiego]

At the time of the Inverness merger there were plenty up in arms about it, many of whom refuse to attend to this day. It gave people an easy out to glory hunt and support Rangers instead. It would never had happened had their been a functioning pyramid as there is today.

Meadowbank to Livingston was the death of a club and its fans were largely scattered to the wind. The new mob are doing surprisingly well but it's perhaps not a coincidence that they attracted a number of dodgy characters along the way.

I've had a few foreigners tell me that one of Scotland's problems (in sport and society) is that we put too much stock in history. In my Italian sticker album it says things like "Padova: founded 2012, best finish 1964." which seems absurd to us.

I think our focus on the past gives the sport in Scotland a richness and depth which doesn't exist in most other countries. I think you see that at the turnstiles; if it wasn't for an identity built up over a century would so many folk turn up to watch St. Mirren or Morton?

[Eednud]

28 minutes ago, Arch Stanton said:

47 minutes ago, ahemps said:

I know it is not a popular opinion but I am not appalled at the idea of clubs merging, Aberdeen and Motherwell were both formed that way, they are the only ones I know of but I'm sure there will have been a few more.

Ayr United (from Ayr FC and Ayr Parkhouse).

Dundee (East End and Our Boys)

[ahemps]

26 minutes ago, DiegoDiego said:

At the time of the Inverness merger there were plenty up in arms about it, many of whom refuse to attend to this day. It gave people an easy out to glory hunt and support Rangers instead. It would never had happened had their been a functioning pyramid as there is today.

Were there no Rangers fans in Inverness before the merger? I meet football fans from Dunfermline, Kilmarnock, Motherwell etc. who support the OF so I would guess they were always there. What was the average attendance of Caledonian and Thistle? 

It's sad for those fans who feel they have lost their club.

Is Inverness big enough for 3 clubs though? It is a bigger city/town than Kilmarnock, Falkirk and Motherwell. Should it have the same amount of teams as Edinburgh and more than Aberdeen and Dundee? 

31 minutes ago, DiegoDiego said:

I've had a few foreigners tell me that one of Scotland's problems (in sport and society) is that we put too much stock in history. In my Italian sticker album it says things like "Padova: founded 2012, best finish 1964." which seems absurd to us.

I think our focus on the past gives the sport in Scotland a richness and depth which doesn't exist in most other countries. I think you see that at the turnstiles; if it wasn't for an identity built up over a century would so many folk turn up to watch St. Mirren or Morton?

This is a good point and I don't disagree with you here but should we ask if history and tradition are stopping us from progression?

[FairWeatherFan]

4 minutes ago, ahemps said:

Is Inverness big enough for 3 clubs though? It is a bigger city/town than Kilmarnock, Falkirk and Motherwell. Should it have the same amount of teams as Edinburgh and more than Aberdeen and Dundee?

Inverness has 3 clubs now in the pyramid: ICT, Clachnacuddin, and Loch Ness. With Inverness Athletic now playing out of Muir of Ord.

That's sort of the point. Caledonian at the time, or Thistle/Clachnacuddin within the pyramid probably would have grown to be the dominant professional club with the rest falling somewhere below.

The pyramid isn't just the SPFL.

 

[ahemps]

4 minutes ago, FairWeatherFan said:

Inverness has 3 clubs now in the pyramid: ICT, Clachnacuddin, and Loch Ness. With Inverness Athletic now playing out of Muir of Ord.

That's sort of the point. Caledonian at the time, or Thistle/Clachnacuddin within the pyramid probably would have grown to be the dominant professional club with the rest falling somewhere below.

The pyramid isn't just the SPFL.

Would they have though? Was one of them already dominant?

If one had got promoted but were getting crowds less than 1k they may have turned out to be like Elgin and floated around the 3rd division, that wouldn't have been enough to have pulled in all the crowds and become the dominant side. Why watch a team float around the 3rd division when you could watch a team compete for the Highland league? I don't know the size of what these clubs were so I am guessing but unless 1 really pulled away and done what ICT have done then I think the pyramid would have stifled that progress rather than accelerated it.

I am not against the pyramid by the way I'm only wondering in this case would it have been a good or bad thing and even that depends on what you want from your club to say if it was a success or not.

[FairWeatherFan]

9 minutes ago, ahemps said:

Would they have though? Was one of them already dominant?

If one had got promoted but were getting crowds less than 1k they may have turned out to be like Elgin and floated around the 3rd division, that wouldn't have been enough to have pulled in all the crowds and become the dominant side. Why watch a team float around the 3rd division when you could watch a team compete for the Highland league? I don't know the size of what these clubs were so I am guessing but unless 1 really pulled away and done what ICT have done then I think the pyramid would have stifled that progress rather than accelerated it.

I am not against the pyramid by the way I'm only wondering in this case would it have been a good or bad thing and even that depends on what you want from your club to say if it was a success or not.

Caledonian after WW2 became the more successful of the 3. How they entered the national leagues would depend on how things would have developed for them.

If it was simply Caledonian voted into the SFL alongside Ross County then the path that ICT have gone could been matched by Caledonian alone for the most part. They played at Telford Park initially, Sergei Baltacha continued as the manager, they probably would have picked up Steve Paterson later on from the Highland League. The main issue for being a lesser light would be the ground issue. With only the one ground to sell there would have been some more cash to find to match it exactly.

 

[HibeeJibee]

So you've reached the "too many clubs" and/or "merge clubs" phase.

For these threads - equivalent of going down the rabbit hole.

[Andy groundhopper]

Would love to see the spfl balanced, with different teams winning silverware. Imagine the OF if they didn't win the league for say 2-3 seasons, NO European games etc , just wonderful. Maybe the non - league now dream of being in the spfl, but do spfl2 clubs  dream of being in the top flight ? 

[footnotes]

The changes I would like to see in time for season 2023/24 beginning.

Make the Premiership playoffs more normal so that all 4 teams play in a semi final over 2 legs, then a single Final match.  (Allows slightly more chance of promotion without any major change)

Expand the Championship to 12 teams with a split at 33 games, with bottom 2 relegated automatically.  (Keeps big clubs playing home and away twice to maximise their revenue yet allows more wee clubs an opportunity at a higher level)

Integrate leagues 1 and 2 to give an 18 team division where the winners are automatically promoted and the next 4 play off for the remaining Championship place.  2 legs semis, single Final decider.  (Playoffs down to fifth and 2 guaranteed promoted to offset larger division, to keep it interesting.  Bit of a mid -table to help teams from non league find their feet a little bit)

Bottom team automatically relegated, to be replaced by winner of Highland-Lowland play off.  (Seems just that winners of non league are promoted directly.  Play off ensures only the best promoted to the league and balances the difference in catchment sizes of lowland and highland areas.

Expand Lowland league to 18 teams. (Fair and more professional that both lowland and highland champions have played a similar number of league matches going into their play off, same as with the other league play offs).

 

[RabidAI]

That's a bit conservative. 

If, instead, you have the bottom two SPFL teams and the top three from each of the HL and LL going into the pyramid play-offs then you give good opportunities for relegated clubs to return immediately and you also can be more sure that the clubs deserve their place in the SPFL the following season.

So you might have the winners of SPFL41 v HL3 meeting the winners of HL1 v LL2 for one SPFL vacancy, and the winners of SPFL 42 v LL3 meeting the winners of LL 1 v HL2 for the other SPFL vacancy.

[Andy groundhopper]

Just a trip back in time (mainly English league's) Would there be any chance or interest in Scotland going North, South etc ? Cut back on travelling and more local derbies. Always thought it might return down south, in lower divisions, one day in the future. 

[Gordon EF]

2 hours ago, Andy groundhopper said:

Just a trip back in time (mainly English league's) Would there be any chance or interest in Scotland going North, South etc ? Cut back on travelling and more local derbies. Always thought it might return down south, in lower divisions, one day in the future. 

Nope. It's been suggested over and over again, and has little to no support amongst lower league clubs. The vast majority of L1 and L2 clubs are in the central belt. A North South split wouldn't result in much less travelling for most clubs and would actually potentially split clubs for derby rivals.

[Donathan]

1 hour ago, Gordon EF said:

Nope. It's been suggested over and over again, and has little to no support amongst lower league clubs. The vast majority of L1 and L2 clubs are in the central belt. A North South split wouldn't result in much less travelling for most clubs and would actually potentially split clubs for derby rivals.

 

If anything, the appetite from clubs to play in national level leagues has increased in recent years rather than decreased. In the earliest days of the pyramid playoff there didn't seem to be a huge appetite from the top HL/LL clubs to come up to L2, but now you've got a number of teams being taken over by sugar daddies and coming up through the leagues. Not only that, but clubs who have been in the junior for literally a century have finally packed it in and joined the SFA. 

 

I think we are probably heading towards a position where we can either look at introducing a new conference tier, or expanding league 2.

 

The English lower leagues play 46 game seasons. Obviously this wouldn't be possible for EPL/Scottish Premiership teams because they're more likely to have cup runs and a handful are in Europe, but I see little reason why the Championship can't expand to 12 teams with no need for a split (44 game season)

 

 

 

 

[RabidAI]

If we're going to have twelve teams in the Championship aswell as the Premiership then split after 33 matchdays into 3 divisions of eight, playing opponents one more time for 40 games each.

That improves on the current system by having two more teams each season with definite home games v the biggest clubs, and an additional home game anyway.  The middle eight improves on the previously rejected proposal because it only requires a 7-game each post-split sprint, rather than splitting too early after just 22 matchdays.*  The bottom eight (rump of Championship) remains interesting with only seven fixtures each and two automatically relegated.

I would also name the current post-split top 6, or top 8 in the above scenario, as the SPFL Masters or Scottish Masters, which sounds a bit naff to us but could sell well abroad. 

My current preference is for a top tier of 16, splitting into top 8 and bottom 8 after 30 matchdays.  Then playing opponents once more to reach 37-games per club, whereupon positions are finalised except for the top 4 who play one another for a fourth time in the SPFL Masters (continuation of league points) to complete 40 games each.  Two to be automatically relegated, with one relegation play-off place v 3/4/5 of Championship).

 

*Middle eight post-split would only be fair and prevent spectre of meaningless games if the initial post-split points were re-set based upon league position up to that point.

E.g. - 9th Prem starts with 14 points, 1st Champ with 12 points, 10th Prem with 10 points, 2nd Champ with 8 points, 11th Prem with 6 points, 3rd Champ with 4 points, 12th Prem with 2 points, 4th Champ with 0 points.

Edited April 2, 2022 by RabidAI

[footnotes]

Ah yes, the cinch Masters.  Shameless!

The SPFL are looking for a new Competitions Executive so here's my audition.

Expand Premier to 14.  Play teams x2 = split at 26 games into top 8, bottom 6.  Bottom 6 play themselves again twice = 36 game season. 2 go down directly, 12th into relegation play off.

Top 8 play teams themselves again once, then wee split at 33 games into top 4 and middle 4.

1st-4th at the wee split play themselves for a fourth time = 36 game season.  5th-8th at the wee split play themselves for a fourth time = 36 game season, aiming for the potential place in Europe by finishing 5th.

Lots of big games.  Not too long a season.

Edited April 3, 2022 by footnotes

[Gordon EF]

The whole 'Masters' or blending of multiple leagues at some point during the season sounds absolutely shite to me. If anyone thinks it'll appeal to folk abroad who'll tune in to watch it in any significant numbers, they're deluded.

Imagine it, "Hey, Sergio, fancy watching a meaningless end of season game between Motherwell and HIbs that has no bearing on a League title race we already don't give a shit about?"

"Ah but hang on, it's called the Scottish Masters now."