League reconstruction: Let's hear your view

[FairWeatherFan]

22 minutes ago, no-brainer said:

Then why do the SPFL split their League Cup group stages and Challenge Cup early rounds on a north-south? There must be something in that.

The Group Stages of the League Cup and the early rounds of the Challenge Cup use midweek dates. That's the main reason for the North/South split to try and cut down on that travel for the smaller part-time teams.

While it does minimise the extremes of Elgin v. Stranraer. It has still seen the likes of Albion Rovers be classed as a North team for the Challenge Cup.

[Oldster]

If they could beef up the second level a bit to give big clubs like Falkirk and Partick and Raith a better chance to stay at that level. That sounds like gerrymandering and probably is but I think maybe Airdrie and Clyde lost a lot of support from being stuck below that level. I'm hopeful that the big juniors clubs will add interest as I think they'll come through quite quickly.

[no-brainer]

2 hours ago, FairWeatherFan said:

The Group Stages of the League Cup and the early rounds of the Challenge Cup use midweek dates. That's the main reason for the North/South split to try and cut down on that travel for the smaller part-time teams.

While it does minimise the extremes of Elgin v. Stranraer. It has still seen the likes of Albion Rovers be classed as a North team for the Challenge Cup.

Right - part-time players have full-time jobs during the week so can't be taking a full day (and night?) off to travel the longest distances; but it's only for a couple of games anyway, rather than the full season of a regionalised league, even though it does give some really long away trips. Seems like a muddle.

Maybe they should go with three regions for the lower league and use local/district cups as qualifiers for the league cup.

[no-brainer]

2 hours ago, Oldster said:

If they could beef up the second level a bit to give big clubs like Falkirk and Partick and Raith a better chance to stay at that level. That sounds like gerrymandering and probably is but I think maybe Airdrie and Clyde lost a lot of support from being stuck below that level. I'm hopeful that the big juniors clubs will add interest as I think they'll come through quite quickly.

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.

[RabidAI]

I'm not sure that it is.

Part-time clubs can also offer youngsters the first-team games that they need to develop; seemingly they often train with their parent clubs, if they are on loan from full-timers to part-timers

Having more full-time clubs is a good thing if there are the fan bases to justify them.

[Gordon EF]

1 hour ago, 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.

A lot of the larger PT clubs probably don't want to go full time unless they've got Willie Haughey money. PT football suits plaenty of players. With PT players being fitter than they've ever been, the best PT players are generally better than the worst FT players. For clubs like Alloa and Arbroath, you can either have your pick of the best PTers or the dregs of the FTers.

If we're talking about developing youngsters. How many current Scotland players were developed at Championship clubs. My bet is, not many.

Edit: You're looking at arguably Declan Gallagher, Stephen O'Donnell, Kenny McLean and Lyndon Dykes.

Edited September 11, 2020 by Gordon EF

[prodcast]

On 08/09/2020 at 21:05, Cyclizine said:

 The saving of twenty to thirty miles of travel (as has previously been estimated) isn't going to be save clubs much cash. Playing regionally doesn't lead to an increase in support, quite the opposite, as you can see by comparing attendances in regionalised leagues.

That doesn't sound quite right. Aren't there clubs playing regionally who have higher average attendances than some of those playing  nationally? Isn't it the case that most clubs further down the pyramid will have lower attendances because they are simply smaller clubs, rather than that being caused by them playing in regional or district leagues? When derbies produce higher attendances than playing against non-rivals, as they surely do  (?), it seems a logical decision to pursue that money.

I'm sure we'll find out more as the pyramid progresses. I wonder if relegation to the Lowland League is already looking like a less fearful prospect for League Two clubs; maybe Berwick and East Stirlingshire will be quite sanguine about where they find themselves.

[St-ow!]

I found this idea on another thread, and I could see it as part of a 16-10-18 SPFL set up:

 

"with an additional European place now, I think a 16-team Premiership becomes possible.

I would split after 30 games, with the top 4 playing home and away again for 36 games each in total, and the bottom 4 doing likewise.

The middle 8 could play each other once more in a continuation of the league and 37 games in total, or could divide into two groups of 4 and then a wee knockout competition.

The winner of the middle 8 would qualify for Europe in seasons where one of the top 4 won the Scottish Cup and so the European place would normally pass to 5th in the league;

if any other team won the Scottish Cup, then 4th in the league would play off against the best team in the middle 8 who had not already qualified for Europe (to cover the possibility of 5th in the league having won the cup)."

 

Edit - you could regionalise the third tier of 18 teams for their fixtures (north, south-east, south-west) but not the table.

Edited September 11, 2020 by St-ow!

[itzdrk]

All this regional stuff is garbage lads. 

[Andy groundhopper]

Think the main problems are with the p.t clubs when they have to play the likes of Elgin, and if players have to get off work on a Saturday. Can't believe that some people don't think regional divisions will increase crowds ,sad state of affairs then. Obvious comparison is when Torquay go to Hartlepool, why ? A reconstruction has to put the survival of all clubs in the long term, priority.

[Classick]

On 01/09/2020 at 09:30, 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.

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).

[parsforlife]

Absolutely nobody running a club at league 1 or 2 will be thinking regionalisation will benefit them.  
 
If your playing professionally at that level you need an understanding employer. Whilst that presents an issue for some the wages you receive are more than enough to realise your ‘main’ job might not have the same prospects than if you were not playing.  The deal between each player and club is up to them but largely your going to be expected to make sure you work your shifts so you are available to play.  

it’s quite blatant than other than the odd extra derby crowds aren’t going to increase much, and indeed for those that might play the bigger sides in league 1 there crowds are going to go down if they are regionalised.  Clubs like Forfar absolutely will choose partick instead of Elgin.

There is an odd idea that regionalisation= local games, madness,  a north/south divide will make no notable impact on the number of local games played, some will see an increase, others a decrease.   If local games is your aim then the main bulk of clubs between dumbarton and Montrose will want to be playing the other central belt sides. And for those outside of that don’t have any concept of local football.  There’s 70 miles between Peterhead and Elgin. 90 Stranraer to Annan.  

also any argument over travel costs are laughable,  a bus to Elgin twice a year is going to make very little impact on your yearly budgeting.   There aren’t managers being told they can’t sign a player because cove went up instead of Edinburgh city. 

I know several amateur athletes who compete internationally, and yet some want to argue well paid pros can’t travel anywhere within Scotland.

Edited September 11, 2020 by parsforlife

[Gordon EF]

2 hours ago, Andy groundhopper said:

Think the main problems are with the p.t clubs when they have to play the likes of Elgin, and if players have to get off work on a Saturday. Can't believe that some people don't think regional divisions will increase crowds ,sad state of affairs then. Obvious comparison is when Torquay go to Hartlepool, why ? A reconstruction has to put the survival of all clubs in the long term, priority.

Aye, it's a nightmare when part time footballers have to take a Saturday off work.

[Gordon EF]

1 hour ago, parsforlife said:

Absolutely nobody running a club at league 1 or 2 will be thinking regionalisation will benefit them.  
 
If your playing professionally at that level you need an understanding employer. Whilst that presents an issue for some the wages you receive are more than enough to realise your ‘main’ job might not have the same prospects than if you were not playing.  The deal between each player and club is up to them but largely your going to be expected to make sure you work your shifts so you are available to play.  

it’s quite blatant than other than the odd extra derby crowds aren’t going to increase much, and indeed for those that might play the bigger sides in league 1 there crowds are going to go down if they are regionalised.  Clubs like Forfar absolutely will choose partick instead of Elgin.

There is an odd idea that regionalisation= local games, madness,  a north/south divide will make no notable impact on the number of local games played, some will see an increase, others a decrease.   If local games is your aim then the main bulk of clubs between dumbarton and Montrose will want to be playing the other central belt sides. And for those outside of that don’t have any concept of local football.  There’s 70 miles between Peterhead and Elgin. 90 Stranraer to Annan.  

also any argument over travel costs are laughable,  a bus to Elgin twice a year is going to make very little impact on your yearly budgeting.   There aren’t managers being told they can’t sign a player because cove went up instead of Edinburgh city. 

I know several amateur athletes who compete internationally, and yet some want to argue well paid pros can’t travel anywhere within Scotland.

This. There always seemed to be a few hardcore who are obsessed with regionalising the lower leagues. Absolutely none of whom seem to  support L1/2 clubs or even clubs at the top end of tier 5. I assume what's behind it is just an obsession with football league structure and all the stuff about travelling, derbies, etc is the justification for it.

[anonanist]

16 hours ago, St-ow! said:

I found this idea on another thread, and I could see it as part of a 16-10-18 SPFL set up:

 

"with an additional European place now, I think a 16-team Premiership becomes possible.

I would split after 30 games, with the top 4 playing home and away again for 36 games each in total, and the bottom 4 doing likewise.

The middle 8 could play each other once more in a continuation of the league and 37 games in total, or could divide into two groups of 4 and then a wee knockout competition.

The winner of the middle 8 would qualify for Europe in seasons where one of the top 4 won the Scottish Cup and so the European place would normally pass to 5th in the league;

if any other team won the Scottish Cup, then 4th in the league would play off against the best team in the middle 8 who had not already qualified for Europe (to cover the possibility of 5th in the league having won the cup)."

 

Edit - you could regionalise the third tier of 18 teams for their fixtures (north, south-east, south-west) but not the table.

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.

Edited September 12, 2020 by anonanist
Tfdh

[anonanist]

9 hours ago, Gordon EF said:

This. There always seemed to be a few hardcore who are obsessed with regionalising the lower leagues. Absolutely none of whom seem to  support L1/2 clubs or even clubs at the top end of tier 5. I assume what's behind it is just an obsession with football league structure and all the stuff about travelling, derbies, etc is the justification for it.

In fairness - what is the topic of this thread that are you posting on?

[Marten]

12 hours ago, Gordon EF said:

This. There always seemed to be a few hardcore who are obsessed with regionalising the lower leagues. Absolutely none of whom seem to  support L1/2 clubs or even clubs at the top end of tier 5. I assume what's behind it is just an obsession with football league structure and all the stuff about travelling, derbies, etc is the justification for it.

That people support regionalisation is fine, everyone can have their own opinion. But what annoys me is that these opinions are generally combined with arguments like "it saves money" which is usually claimed as fact even though there is no evidence to actually support these claims. Travel cost reduction (if any) will be very limited and it can likely easily be offset against loss of income elsewhere...

Edited September 12, 2020 by Marten

[RabidAI]

Less miles = less money on petrol, presumably?

13 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).

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

[Cyclizine]

15 minutes ago, Marten said:

That people support regionalisation is fine, everyone can have their own opinion. But what annoys me is that these opinions are generally combined with arguments like "it saves money" which is usually claimed as fact even though there is no evidence to actually support these claims. Travel cost reduction (if any) will be very limited and it can likeley easily be offset against loss of income elsewhere...

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.

[Gordon EF]

2 hours ago, anonanist said:

In fairness - what is the topic of this thread that are you posting on?

Well aye. We're all discussing the league structure. My point is more about the persistence of a few people who'll come on and make this argument every few weeks despite no lower leagues clubs wanting it, no lower league supporters wanting it and the arguments about travelling, derbies, etc being continually shown to be garbage.