League reconstruction: Let's hear your view

[Unknown Fan]

48 minutes ago, 1320Lichtie said:

 

It IS sustainable. This is a fact.

 

ETA: for an away game to Annan, it’ll take Peterhead’s goalkeeper 5 minutes to get to the game. Peterhead’s wages are that good that they can afford a goalkeeper from annan and a winger (as pointed out above) from Dumfries. What makes you think they’re struggling when they’re doing things like that?

Fair enough though completely nuts arrangement, fair play to them. Sure they have that player McAllister that is playing a level or 2 below where he could through that's down to wanting to play for the local team?

[1320Lichtie]

Fair enough though completely nuts arrangement, fair play to them. Sure they have that player McAllister that is playing a level or 2 below where he could through that's down to wanting to play for the local team?

Sort of. McAllister is from Aberdeen. He’s reportedly on a lot of money (heard £650) at Peterhead. The PT wage combined with his FT job is more than any offer he would have at a FT club. We also benefit from this a lot. We have a few guys who had FT offers from Dundee United and ICT in the summer, but the deals weren’t worth giving their full time careers up for.

[1320Lichtie]

The SPFL has been a closed shop for decades.  This is only the 4th year in recent history that a club can gain promotion on merit and not by some in house vote. Hence the clubs within the SPFL yours being one has a long line of history and tradition within the league system and all the luxuries that come with that.

Scottish league system is bizarre there are dozen and more clubs outwith the the SPFL that are just as good and would probably love to be in the position your club is in though there is only this small mouses trapdoor from the SPFL that is heavily weighted in favour of the team finishing 10th in league 2.  Last year like every other since the 1/3 a chance of getting promoted away goals didn't count for EK.  

Though as it stands there are 4 Highland league teams still in the Scottish Cup one League 2 team a handful of League 2.  Teams below the Prem and Championship and possible top of league one (the full time clubs) after that there is little in difference in possible way of standard between 30 odd League 2, Lowland, Highland and well run Junior clubs. 

There is a possibility in time the top Highland and Junior clubs will filter through and you may be as likely as going to Bank o'Dee,Cove or Linlithgow on a day out as you are to Forfar or Annan.

 

 

There’s a big difference in the standard between the top of league 1 and mid table league 2 as I witnessed just last week. I’ve watched it week in week out for years. There’s a noticeable difference.

 

And it’s been open for 4 years now, and one club has went down, the perennial whipping boys East Stirling. The club that come up aren’t far off going down once again.

 

There’s a handful of clubs who IMO are big enough for the SPFL, your Polloks, Bo’ness, Linlithgows.

 

But even then would these clubs be of a same size and have the same support when they have to charge £14 a head for supporters and spend a lot of money to get their facilities up to a suitable standard? Would the teams they’re able to put out on the park be as good as what they are now? Not so sure. I have a feeling their crowds would decline and the quality of their teams would lessen from where they are even now.

 

Kelty are making good progress on both fronts though and I wish them well.

 

As for Arbroath I’m not worried about is dropping out the league any time soon, last year there were only 2 part time teams with a better average attendance than ourselves and both were in the championship. The year we finished 9th and won a handful of games in league 2 we were still averaging not far off 700. We’ll be fine thanks.

 

I really don’t think any league club outwith the real strugglers, Cowdens, Berwicks etc are worried about any outside clubs taking their place. It’s a miracle nobody was able to take the place of the side Cowden had last year. One of the worst sides I’ve ever seen and they still managed to stay up. The clubs are just not out there.

 

[Unknown Fan]

4 minutes ago, 1320Lichtie said:

 

Sort of. McAllister is from Aberdeen. He’s reportedly on a lot of money (heard £650) at Peterhead. The PT wage combined with his FT job is more than any offer he would have at a FT club. We also benefit from this a lot. We have a few guys who had FT offers from Dundee United and ICT in the summer, but the deals weren’t worth giving their full time careers up for.

 

Same as some League of Ireland players St Johnstone are said to be looking at a few Dundalk players though the forward David McMillan he has a full time professional career architect I think.  Be interested how he gets on if he does make the move.

[FairWeatherFan]

35 minutes ago, Unknown Fan said:

Aye so League 2 dissolves into the regional, though again that will never happen turkeys for... and all that and all that. 

That's why I called it pie in the sky and the distinction of SPFL Highland & SPFL Lowland. They'd still be full members of the SPFL, still participate in the revenue distribution, still be in the League Cup and Challenge Cup, etc.

I'd also hope that 3 tier SPFL structure would be more attractive to Junior clubs who are supposedly put off by the current 4 tier SPFL with it's "small divisions, repetitive games and long trips" that you usually here as complaints.

35 minutes ago, Unknown Fan said:

As said League of Ireland for a pro semi pro summer league teams have got to Europa league stages twice in the last 6 years.

I accept our clubs should do better than what they have done and this is embarassing to a lot of us.

You've just to remember the Irish Champions League reps in the last 6 completed seasons have made the Europa League group stages twice and the Scottish Champions League reps have actually made the Champions League proper on multiple occasions.

When the Irish League Runners up make the group stage of a competition i'll be a lot more worried about the state of Scottish football in comparison. This is also going to get a helluva lot harder for both leagues with the changes to the European qualifying campaigns.

[1320Lichtie]

Same as some League of Ireland players St Johnstone are said to be looking at a few Dundalk players though the forward David McMillan he has a full time professional career architect I think.  Be interested how he gets on if he does make the move.

There’s a balance to be found. Airdrie for example are much better off as a PT club compared to being a FT club.

Dumbarton probably benefit from this the most. They’re picking up some excellent younger players and players that are coming to the end of their full time football careers and transitioning into careers outside the game whilst still playing too.

[Unknown Fan]

2 minutes ago, FairWeatherFan said:

That's why I called it pie in the sky and the distinction of SPFL Highland & SPFL Lowland. They'd still be full members of the SPFL, still participate in the revenue distribution, still be in the League Cup and Challenge Cup, etc.

I'd also hope that 3 tier SPFL structure would be more attractive to Junior clubs who are supposedly put off by the current 4 tier SPFL with it's "small divisions, repetitive games and long trips" that you usually here as complaints.

I accept our clubs should do better than what they have done and this is embarassing to a lot of us.

You've just to remember the Irish Champions League reps in the last 6 completed seasons have made the Europa League group stages twice and the Scottish Champions League reps have actually made the Champions League proper on multiple occasions.

When the Irish League Runners up make the group stage of a competition i'll be a lot more worried about the state of Scottish football in comparison. This is also going to get a helluva lot harder for both leagues with the changes to the European qualifying campaigns.

Yeah partly though the Northern Irish league is light years away from making the Europa group stages.  For The Irish, southern Irish champions to make it to the Europa group stages is a complete over achievement already though in a way there is a better chance to make the group stages of the Europa league now than before under the old set up.  Every Champions league qualifier has a 2nd go at the Europa league through the Champions route to the Europa league group stages.  

As I said before Dundalk making the group stages of the Europa league is like a team that plays on 4g pitch with a stadium like Auchenleck Talbot and an average crowd similarto Mortonpicking up about 9 mill euro in prize funds mostly due to making through to the Champions league play off round and not the Europa League itself.

https://kassiesa.home.xs4all.nl/bert/uefa/AccessList2018.html

[Unknown Fan]

1 hour ago, FairWeatherFan said:

That's why I called it pie in the sky and the distinction of SPFL Highland & SPFL Lowland. They'd still be full members of the SPFL, still participate in the revenue distribution, still be in the League Cup and Challenge Cup, etc.

I'd also hope that 3 tier SPFL structure would be more attractive to Junior clubs who are supposedly put off by the current 4 tier SPFL with it's "small divisions, repetitive games and long trips" that you usually here as complaints.

Yeah I would take that, though the tradition of the Highland league kicking out Fort William and a few other smaller teams to make way, the lower SPFL clubs like Clyde playing in the same league as Cumbernauld Colts  BSC Glasgow Alloa and then there's possibly Alloa too.  The Highland League falling under SPFL full control and certain tradition.  Where would the bottom teams go Juniors as a feeder, NCL feasible for some clubs and I doubt the SFA reluctant for structured SFA ratified league to fall into an overlapped region with a Junior controlled league at the same level.  That would be the same for EoS league and the East Junior Region and likewise with any West Region equivalent as a parallel to a West JuniorRegion top division.

With the present set up remaining the same it is possible the Lowland league in a few years has the potential to be stronger and most competitive part time league in Scotland.   At that point some more reform you would hope take place.           

Edited November 24, 2017 by Unknown Fan

[FairWeatherFan]

29 minutes ago, Unknown Fan said:

Yeah partly though the Northern Irish league is light years away from making the Europa group stages.  For The Irish, southern Irish champions to make it to the Europa group stages is a complete over achievement already though in a way there is a better chance to make the group stages of the Europa league now than before under the old set up.  Every Champions league qualifier has a 2nd go at the Europa league through the Champions route to the Europa league group stages.  

As I said before Dundalk making the group stages of the Europa league is like a team that plays on 4g pitch with a stadium like Auchenleck Talbot and an average crowd similarto Mortonpicking up about 9 mill euro in prize funds mostly due to making through to the Champions league play off round and not the Europa League itself.

https://kassiesa.home.xs4all.nl/bert/uefa/AccessList2018.html

Think there might of been some slight crossed wires in that. Everything I was trying to say related purely to the Republic of Ireland's league. By Irish League Runners up I was meaning the 2nd place team in the Republic of Ireland.

Dundalk doing what they did was incredibly impressive to me, same for Shamrock Rovers. They just benefited greatly from starting in the CL pathway. Which is why i don't like people using them to make a comparison to the likes of Aberdeen/St. Johnstone and what they've done in Europe.

That's why i'll seriously worry about that state of Scottish Football compared to the Republic Ireland once their 2nd best team outperform the achievements of our 2nd best.

[Unknown Fan]

41 minutes ago, FairWeatherFan said:

Think there might of been some slight crossed wires in that. Everything I was trying to say related purely to the Republic of Ireland's league. By Irish League Runners up I was meaning the 2nd place team in the Republic of Ireland.

Dundalk doing what they did was incredibly impressive to me, same for Shamrock Rovers. They just benefited greatly from starting in the CL pathway. Which is why i don't like people using them to make a comparison to the likes of Aberdeen/St. Johnstone and what they've done in Europe.

That's why i'll seriously worry about that state of Scottish Football compared to the Republic Ireland once their 2nd best team outperform the achievements of our 2nd best.

Well the CL pathway and Summer football remember it is a semi pro league like a half and half of bottom of Scottish Champ and League One well in terms of stadia and sizes of clubs.

So Dundalk Aberdeen it is then, be Bohemians the 2nd.

https://kassiesa.home.xs4all.nl/bert/uefa/data/method5/trank2018.html

Dundalk have better co efficient so have better chance of getting seeded, though possible Aberdeen could skip a round.

Dundalk ranked 187, 5.500, 

English Welsh team The New Saints 5.000 

Aberdeen 4.000, ranked 236

Best of luck.

Dundalk and Cork City are 2 of the best run clubs and strongest at the moment, Shamrock strong enough too.

 

Edited November 24, 2017 by Unknown Fan

[EdTheDuck]

9 hours ago, Unknown Fan said:

So that's the logic in the 4 games a season that helps the the bigger clubs get be gates and less chance of a closer competitive title race in a 16 or 18 team league.  It's like the Scottish fella from Dad's Army feel to it 'we're doomed' to any hint of change anyway.  Summer football again would solve that and Scottish Club European performances.  Surely now the likes of Hibs Hearts and Aberdeen would love to make the group stages of the Europa League especially the 2 Edinburgh clubs Stadiums the fans would love it.  Scottish Cup final on St Andrew's day, League completed anytime before Christmas  

Your enthusiasm is quite commendable, but I fear misplaced. While some of your suggestions are interesting and even potentially beneficial, you fall into the trap of believing myths and legends.

·         For example, the idea that a 16 or 18 team league, of itself, would create a competitive league is wrong.

·         Your belief that more people will turn out for a more varied schedule simply because it was more varied, is wrong.

·         Any enlargement of the Europa League will be to cater for the additional mid-range clubs tipped out of the UCL, not for more "dross" to enter.

·         The mini-leagues will not happen. There have been attempts at a Scandinavian League and it was abandoned after 3 years because fans weren't interested and, more importantly, neither were TV viewers.

·         During World Cup/Euro years there is not even a snowball's chance of the 'show going on' because at least a couple of teams (you know who, right?) will have players away on duty; they will not countenance it.

·         The Irish playing an unbalanced 33 game schedule and the OF doing the same have absolutely nothing in common. Carnage, plain and simple.

·         Dundalk & Shamrock were eliminated from the UCL into the EL, completely different scenario from that faced by Aberdeen, Hearts, St. Johnstone etc.

·         Even the remote possibility of just 4 home games in four and a half months guarantees your bizarre splitting HFL/SLFL is a non-starter and your glib dismissal of it does not change that.

The 14-14-14 might be ok but it’s a bit meh, TBH. If it did happen a 6/8 split makes more sense IMO. This gives the top 6 a programme of 36 games (which would keep them all happy) and the bottom 8 40 games - the extra home game would compensate for missing out on a visit from OF, Aberdeen, Hearts, Hibs or a local rival maybe.

However, changing to a Summer League just so one of our teams can maybe qualify for the Europa League now and again is a waste of time. Aberdeen qualifying for the EL does absolutely nothing to benefit 30-odd other teams. Why would they inconvenience themselves and their fans to benefit a couple of city clubs?

Given the resources of Scottish clubs like Aberdeen, Hearts, Hibs, we should have a presence in the EL Groups now and again without any need to switch to Summer football. That we don’t suggests we are wasting money, that we are spending it on coaches/players who aren’t good enough. However, with some of the guys currently managing in Scotland mow I think things will improve soon.

[Salvo Montalbano]

Your enthusiasm is quite commendable, but I fear misplaced. While some of your suggestions are interesting and even potentially beneficial, you fall into the trap of believing myths and legends.
·         For example, the idea that a 16 or 18 team league, of itself, would create a competitive league is wrong.

·         Your belief that more people will turn out for a more varied schedule simply because it was more varied, is wrong.

·         Any enlargement of the Europa League will be to cater for the additional mid-range clubs tipped out of the UCL, not for more "dross" to enter.

·         The mini-leagues will not happen. There have been attempts at a Scandinavian League and it was abandoned after 3 years because fans weren't interested and, more importantly, neither were TV viewers.

·         During World Cup/Euro years there is not even a snowball's chance of the 'show going on' because at least a couple of teams (you know who, right?) will have players away on duty; they will not countenance it.

·         The Irish playing an unbalanced 33 game schedule and the OF doing the same have absolutely nothing in common. Carnage, plain and simple.

·         Dundalk & Shamrock were eliminated from the UCL into the EL, completely different scenario from that faced by Aberdeen, Hearts, St. Johnstone etc.

·         Even the remote possibility of just 4 home games in four and a half months guarantees your bizarre splitting HFL/SLFL is a non-starter and your glib dismissal of it does not change that.

The 14-14-14 might be ok but it’s a bit meh, TBH. If it did happen a 6/8 split makes more sense IMO. This gives the top 6 a programme of 36 games (which would keep them all happy) and the bottom 8 40 games - the extra home game would compensate for missing out on a visit from OF, Aberdeen, Hearts, Hibs or a local rival maybe.

However, changing to a Summer League just so one of our teams can maybe qualify for the Europa League now and again is a waste of time. Aberdeen qualifying for the EL does absolutely nothing to benefit 30-odd other teams. Why would they inconvenience themselves and their fans to benefit a couple of city clubs?

Given the resources of Scottish clubs like Aberdeen, Hearts, Hibs, we should have a presence in the EL Groups now and again without any need to switch to Summer football. That we don’t suggests we are wasting money, that we are spending it on coaches/players who aren’t good enough. However, with some of the guys currently managing in Scotland mow I think things will improve soon.

Agree with this. The whole idea of carrying on during the World Cup or Euros is usually followed up with an argument about them doing so in Ireland. But when Northern Ireland and Eire qualify, it's not the Irish Leagues that suffer from call ups, it's the English and Scottish teams that supply the players. Added to that, at the most recent Euros there were a smattering of players elsewhere that were or had been or were soon to be playing in our League at the Scandanavian countries etc. And all that was without Scotland qualifying. If we did then there would be half a dozen teams with a few players (not to mention coaches, physios and - something nobody ever seems to acknowledge - fans) away for that period of time.

The idea that it would do to football crowds what Wimbledon does to tennis is amongst the most bizarre and bonkers claim I've heard on here. Ignoring the fact that other tournaments don't run at the same time as Wimbledon, the average fairweather fan who watches the World Cup but not regular domestic football isn't suddenly find out there's a pro football club on their doorstep in the same way you might not know there's a tennis club or whatever in your town. You're also going to be hard pressed getting those fairweather fans off their sofa to watch a game at £20-25 a pop when they can watch the World's best players on free to view TV.

Which brings in the next point - even if UEFA/FIFA did allow TV companies to broadcast live football at the same time as their showpiece tournaments and even if we had a league still running during it, who is going to pay to broadcast it up against a Euros or a World Cup on the BBC and ITV?

[SpoonTon]

21 hours ago, 1320Lichtie said:

 

The regionalised thing does my nut in. You’ll find it’s never fans of the part time clubs that want it, it’s always those looking in from above. I have no interest in watching Arbroath play regionalised football and neither does any other Arbroath supporter I know. We’re comfortable on a national level and playing regionalised games would be a total disaster for us. If I wanted to watch regional football with local players infront of 2 men and a dug I’d go and watch Arbroath Vics instead.

 

 

That was my point, which I think you've very much read the wrong way. I've been posting on here more than long enough to know that this is a very unpopular idea among ans of clubs like Arbroath (I also wasn't advocating that Ayr play regional football, btw). I was simply pointing out that regional football would work in Scotland, and work very well, if there was a will for it. The Highlands being a massive region doesn't take away from the positive aspects of regional football - there are always big regions and smaller regions throughout leagues in Europe, that's just how it works.

As I said from the start, I understand very well that this is not what the fans of the clubs in the national leagues want. My point was simply that regions do have a purpose, you just have to want to be involved in that type of set-up. 

The reason why so many people suggest it isn't because they care about teams playing at the bottom of the national league. It's the opposite. They think they should face proper competition for their place in the league. and to do that yo need to have a system which encourages progression. It might suck for a team like Montrose, but the reality is that they're just a glorified Junior team which happens to be in possession of a league spot (maybe I'm being a tad harsh, but that's the feeling  - it's quite clear that East Stirlingshire, for example, hung around like a bad smell for far too long). People without a vested interest in those clubs would just like to see things freshened up a bit - and the current system doesn't encourage ambition.

[1320Lichtie]

That was my point, which I think you've very much read the wrong way. I've been posting on here more than long enough to know that this is a very unpopular idea among ans of clubs like Arbroath (I also wasn't advocating that Ayr play regional football, btw). I was simply pointing out that regional football would work in Scotland, and work very well, if there was a will for it. The Highlands being a massive region doesn't take away from the positive aspects of regional football - there are always big regions and smaller regions throughout leagues in Europe, that's just how it works.

As I said from the start, I understand very well that this is not what the fans of the clubs in the national leagues want. My point was simply that regions do have a purpose, you just have to want to be involved in that type of set-up. 

The reason why so many people suggest it isn't because they care about teams playing at the bottom of the national league. It's the opposite. They think they should face proper competition for their place in the league. and to do that yo need to have a system which encourages progression. It might suck for a team like Montrose, but the reality is that they're just a glorified Junior team which happens to be in possession of a league spot (maybe I'm being a tad harsh, but that's the feeling  - it's quite clear that East Stirlingshire, for example, hung around like a bad smell for far too long). People without a vested interest in those clubs would just like to see things freshened up a bit - and the current system doesn't encourage ambition.

 

How many junior teams have facilities and a stadium as good as Montrose do? Are there any? I doubt it.

 

How many junior teams get better crowds than Montrose? League crowds, not the shitey junior cup?

 

Things would freshen up if there were clubs out there that are actually capable of coming into the SPFL, there currently aren’t any. It’s not like there are loads of glaring omissions just now.

[SpoonTon]

7 hours ago, 1320Lichtie said:

 

How many junior teams have facilities and a stadium as good as Montrose do? Are there any? I doubt it.

 

How many junior teams get better crowds than Montrose? League crowds, not the shitey junior cup?

 

Things would freshen up if there were clubs out there that are actually capable of coming into the SPFL, there currently aren’t any. It’s not like there are loads of glaring omissions just now.

The point is that the system isn't in place to allow clubs to develop and progress. And that's what people are searching for with talk of regionalisation in these discussions. There are clubs who have come in and freshened things up, and are competing further up than Montrose, so I don't think there's a case for suggesting that the alternatives just don't exist - they just don't have the platform to develop. 

The only thing that makes a club like Montrose different to many Junior clubs is that they have been in possession of a league place, and the benefits which come along with that. 

[RabidAl]

On 11/23/2017 at 14:44, RabidAl said:

Apropos of former discussion about whether #games vs the Old Firm (or # head-to-heads in a league season) made any difference to the chance of the 'best of the rest' challenging...

...I did a wee bit of research into it and didn't really find anything conclusive (surprise); there's the inevitable attachment here, showing the best OF and best non-OF points totals in each post-war season, using 3 points/win and then multiplying the resulting points/game ratio by 38 for each OF & non-OF team to give an even comparison with today's 12 team, 38 game season.

In case the attachment doesn't work, a the main result was/results were:

- the best non-OF team averages 10 points more in seasons where they play the OF only 4 times, rather than 8 (general average taken from 1945-75; 2012-2016);

- the best non-OF team gains 6-11 points on average and closes the gap on the best OF team by 5-10 points in seasons where they only play the OF 4 times rather than 8 times (same thing, but using a couple of specific examples to give the points range).

Even if it's accurate/true, it wouldn't really mean anything other than a more sustained title challenge with a larger league, maybe larger attendances whilst the challenge lasted. 

 

There's a breakdown by league size, type (split/no-split) and pre-/post- shared gates in there also.

Obviously it is proof of nothing, and there are plenty of holes to pick in it, but it kept me busy for a wee while.

Points of note also: Hibs would have won the '52-'53 season under 3 points/win and Hearts would have scored a hypothetical 102 points in '57-'58.

Top Tier Size & Competitiveness.xlsx

Meant to say that the investigation in the attachment used the actual league points/positions from the SPFL Archive, every post-war season, then upgrading them with 3 points/win, and taken over a 38 game season.

There was a correlation between the best non-OF closing the gap and seasons in which they played the OF only 4 times per season.

To find out if there was causation here (i.e. fewer games vs OF/other rivals actually causing the closing of the gap & higher points totals for the best non-OF), there were two historical examples available in which the impact of a change in resources or other factors could be stripped out: namely, from 1975-81 and from 2012-16. 

On the first occasion, the change from 18-team league to 10-team league resulted in the best non-OF team closing the gap and earning more points, in the range highlighted in bold above.  This was due to the shift to playing the OF/other key rivals twice as often. 

(Then, in 1981, gates were no longer shared, were retained by clubs, and so there were no further seasons for fair comparison at that time.  It seems that from 1981-86, with Rangers having spent so much money on making Ibrox 40,000 all-seater, they couldn't field a decent team; it may also have been the case that retaining gate receipts was initially of benefit to the large non-OF clubs; perhaps going some way to explaining why Dundee Utd, Hearts and Aberdeen were successful in this period.) 

On the second occasion, Rangers went bust and so we had the best non-OF team only playing the best OF team 4 times in the season.  Again, this resulted in the best non-OF team earning more points on average and closing the gap to the best OF team, highlighted above.   

So, it would seem from the historical evidence that a larger top tier where teams play the Old Firm and their other closest rivals on fewer occasions not only results in them scoring more points, but also leads to closer competition for the title.

Also of note was the large increase in gap between the best non-OF team and the best OF team once we started using a 12-team league, 38-game season; this seems to be the least competitive of all set-ups, with the gap being much larger in this set-up than it was with 10-team, 36-game and 12-team, 44 game seasons.  Possibly partly due to the best non-OF team playing the weakest teams in the league only 3 times in the current set-up rather than 4 times in the other, no-split versions of the small league, and so fewer easy points being available in the current system.   

[1320Lichtie]

The point is that the system isn't in place to allow clubs to develop and progress. And that's what people are searching for with talk of regionalisation in these discussions. There are clubs who have come in and freshened things up, and are competing further up than Montrose, so I don't think there's a case for suggesting that the alternatives just don't exist - they just don't have the platform to develop. 

The only thing that makes a club like Montrose different to many Junior clubs is that they have been in possession of a league place, and the benefits which come along with that. 

 

And they’re a bigger club that have more fans and a better set up and a better ground than the vast vast majority of junior clubs, that also makes them different to junior clubs. Oh and they’re also a senior club. There’s a junior club in Montrose, why aren’t they a senior club instead of them?

 

You can allow clubs to progress into the league. There is now a system in place for that. That doesn’t require regionalisation at the level Montrose play at.

[DA Baracus]

The bottom club in League 2 should be relegated automatically.

The winners of the Highland and Lowland Leagues should be in a playoff. The winners automatically go up to League 2. The losers play the team who finished 9th in League 2, with the winner of that tie taking a League 2 spot and the loser a Highland/Lowland League spot.

[SpoonTon]

1 hour ago, 1320Lichtie said:

 

And they’re a bigger club that have more fans and a better set up and a better ground than the vast vast majority of junior clubs, that also makes them different to junior clubs. Oh and they’re also a senior club. There’s a junior club in Montrose, why aren’t they a senior club instead of them?

 

You can allow clubs to progress into the league. There is now a system in place for that. That doesn’t require regionalisation at the level Montrose play at.

That's my point, being an established part of the senior set-up comes with a number of benefits, and their many years in the senior ranks makes those benefits visible. And for all that they struggle to average 400 home fans at games. I'm not saying that there are ready made clubs to replace them, I'm saying that they system does not encourage clubs to progress to that level to provide competition for the clubs at the bottom of the senior ranks. There are many larger towns, throughout Scotland, who do not have senior clubs. In that sense clubs like Montrose, based only on history, find themselves in a privileged position. 

When fans make suggestions for regionalising the leagues, part of what they're trying to do is make the lowest level of the national leagues more attractive to clubs looking to progress. It's the searching for a system which is attractive for those used to regional football. Even at that, most suggestions usually retain most clubs currently playing in national leagues at that level. Being part of the senior set-up might let their club progress over time, but the fourth tier of Scottish football isn't all that immediately attractive. I, of course, understand the will for self-preservation among the clubs at the lowest level, but you surely understand the will among other fans to want to see if things can be freshened up a bit?  

 

[EdTheDuck]

6 hours ago, RabidAl said:

Meant to say that the investigation in the attachment used the actual league points/positions from the SPFL Archive, every post-war season, then upgrading them with 3 points/win, and taken over a 38 game season.

There was a correlation between the best non-OF closing the gap and seasons in which they played the OF only 4 times per season.

To find out if there was causation here (i.e. fewer games vs OF/other rivals actually causing the closing of the gap & higher points totals for the best non-OF), there were two historical examples available in which the impact of a change in resources or other factors could be stripped out: namely, from 1975-81 and from 2012-16. 

On the first occasion, the change from 18-team league to 10-team league resulted in the best non-OF team closing the gap and earning more points, in the range highlighted in bold above.  This was due to the shift to playing the OF/other key rivals twice as often. 

(Then, in 1981, gates were no longer shared, were retained by clubs, and so there were no further seasons for fair comparison at that time.  It seems that from 1981-86, with Rangers having spent so much money on making Ibrox 40,000 all-seater, they couldn't field a decent team; it may also have been the case that retaining gate receipts was initially of benefit to the large non-OF clubs; perhaps going some way to explaining why Dundee Utd, Hearts and Aberdeen were successful in this period.) 

On the second occasion, Rangers went bust and so we had the best non-OF team only playing the best OF team 4 times in the season.  Again, this resulted in the best non-OF team earning more points on average and closing the gap to the best OF team, highlighted above.   

So, it would seem from the historical evidence that a larger top tier where teams play the Old Firm and their other closest rivals on fewer occasions not only results in them scoring more points, but also leads to closer competition for the title.

Also of note was the large increase in gap between the best non-OF team and the best OF team once we started using a 12-team league, 38-game season; this seems to be the least competitive of all set-ups, with the gap being much larger in this set-up than it was with 10-team, 36-game and 12-team, 44 game seasons.  Possibly partly due to the best non-OF team playing the weakest teams in the league only 3 times in the current set-up rather than 4 times in the other, no-split versions of the small league, and so fewer easy points being available in the current system.   

Apples and Oranges, old chap