League reconstruction: Let's hear your view

[invergowrie arab]

10 team divisions can get to f**k.

They seem wonderfully exciting to outsiders as the league is so close but it's just grim to watch everyone feart to lose every week.

The idea that someone can be in a relegation playoff place one week and promotion one 3 weeks later isn't good. It's stupid. 

[SecretCEO]

I still think there's potential in having divisions of 12, with scope for doing something different after matchday 33. 

The obvious one is to revisit Premiership and Championship divisions of 12, dividing into three sections of 8 after 33 games each, but with the teams in each mini-league playing one another just once, for a 40 game season per team. 

That would eradicate the concern over splitting too early in the season the last time that proposal was voted on, although there would still need to be some way of fairly rewarding teams in the middle section for their season up to the split, rather than starting the mini-league with zero points each.

Another possibility, after 33 games each, would be to split into 3 sections of 8 again - but then seed those teams into groups of 4, playing every group opponent x1, then knockout rounds, to determine Premiership winners, European places, promotion/relegation between the top tiers, and who is relegated/in relegation playoffs with tier 3.

There's no reason why they couldn't mix the two systems, such as the top 8 if the Premiership carrying on to 40 games, the middle 8 playing in seeded groups of 4 to work out promotion/relegation, the bottom 8 of the Championship stopping at 33 games to prepare for playoffs below.

I'm sure there are other possibilities, but I think teams playing every opponent x3 is reasonably fair to start with, and 33 games each/16 guaranteed home games is a good basic minimum from which to do something different.

Also - if they're seriously looking at admitting 6 teams to the SPFL, then four divisions of 12 (or even three divisions of 16) appears much more balanced than 12-10-10-16.

Edited April 11, 2021 by SecretCEO

[stm]

As the winners of the SPL appear to be heading directly into the CL group stages for a period of time, which themselves are to be reconstructed to increase group fixtures, there is no chance that either Celtic or Rangers will wish to play a forty game league campaign.  

 

In contrast, I'd  expect them to view a 6-8, 14 team league split after 26 games more favourably, as it would cut their league games to 36, while still appeasing sides lower down who wish to have a 'no less' than 12 club top tier.

[SecretCEO]

My hideous confession is that I'm disappointed that the Premiership clubs have punted the colts/restructuring proposal.

I felt sure anything that drained resources from the old firm would have enhanced the possibility of a non old firm league champion. And I like SPFL expansion as a means to support the growth of the pyramid.

Whilst I go cry into my cornflakes, here's what the Donc had to say about it:

https://www.msn.com/en-gb/sport/news/neil-doncaster-addresses-rangers-and-celtic-colts-question-as-he-urges-scottish-football-to-be-open-minded/ar-BB1frPko

 

 

 

Edited April 16, 2021 by SecretCEO

[rainbowrising]

On 11/04/2021 at 08:24, SecretCEO said:

I still think there's potential in having divisions of 12, with scope for doing something different after matchday 33. 

The obvious one is to revisit Premiership and Championship divisions of 12, dividing into three sections of 8 after 33 games each, but with the teams in each mini-league playing one another just once, for a 40 game season per team. 

That would eradicate the concern over splitting too early in the season the last time that proposal was voted on, although there would still need to be some way of fairly rewarding teams in the middle section for their season up to the split, rather than starting the mini-league with zero points each.

Another possibility, after 33 games each, would be to split into 3 sections of 8 again - but then seed those teams into groups of 4, playing every group opponent x1, then knockout rounds, to determine Premiership winners, European places, promotion/relegation between the top tiers, and who is relegated/in relegation playoffs with tier 3.

There's no reason why they couldn't mix the two systems, such as the top 8 if the Premiership carrying on to 40 games, the middle 8 playing in seeded groups of 4 to work out promotion/relegation, the bottom 8 of the Championship stopping at 33 games to prepare for playoffs below.

I'm sure there are other possibilities, but I think teams playing every opponent x3 is reasonably fair to start with, and 33 games each/16 guaranteed home games is a good basic minimum from which to do something different.

Also - if they're seriously looking at admitting 6 teams to the SPFL, then four divisions of 12 (or even three divisions of 16) appears much more balanced than 12-10-10-16.

My mad cap idea skirts around some of yours. 

Divisions of 12, play each divisional team twice so 22 games then split 6 home/6 away against the other divisions 12 teams, so 34 game season. So the season would involve games where Championship and Premiership teams are playing head to head over the season. 

[theboke]

On 19/04/2021 at 08:27, rainbowrising said:

My mad cap idea skirts around some of yours. 

Divisions of 12, play each divisional team twice so 22 games then split 6 home/6 away against the other divisions 12 teams, so 34 game season. So the season would involve games where Championship and Premiership teams are playing head to head over the season. 

Sounds exciting. Lots of variety in fixtures and would spread money down to smaller clubs. But maybe the Premiership clubs wouldn't be as keen on that.

Might have a a similar drawback if it was suggested for Championship-League One divisions of 12.

Possibly best suited to 12 team divisions in League One and League Two.

 

Edit.

They could use the same principle to support the pyramid -

A 10 team League 2 playing home and away for 18 games each,

but also playing once against every team in a 10-team Lowland League, and once against every team in a 10-team Highland League,

giving a 38 game season for each League Two team, with lots of interesting away games, at the apex of the pyramid. 

 

So the LL teams would just play one another at home and away, and would play each League 2 team either at home or away, for a 28 game season - and ditto for the HL teams, in their respective situation.

(Or the LL and HL teams could also play each other once, at home or away, for a 38 game season - but that may be too many games.)

 

And all that familiarity between League 2 and the Highland/ Lowland leagues would enable more promotion and relegation between league and non-league, without the fear of the unknown opponent and within a known, tested league structure.

 

Edited April 22, 2021 by theboke
Ramblings

[SecretCEO]

On 11/04/2021 at 15:39, stm said:

As the winners of the SPL appear to be heading directly into the CL group stages for a period of time, which themselves are to be reconstructed to increase group fixtures, there is no chance that either Celtic or Rangers will wish to play a forty game league campaign.  

 

In contrast, I'd  expect them to view a 6-8, 14 team league split after 26 games more favourably, as it would cut their league games to 36, while still appeasing sides lower down who wish to have a 'no less' than 12 club top tier.

I don't see Premiership regulars voting for a structure that cuts them off from playing at home x2 against every big club.

I do see the Old Firm agreeing to a season with 40 league games each, particularly if colts teams are part of the quid pro quo; also, i understand that the new Champions League format will give them 10 games in Europe before Christmas, which must be about what they play now.

On that basis, they could look at splitting the league 8/4 after 33 matchday, playing opponents once more to give 40 games each for the top 8 and 36 games each for the bottom 4.

Premiership regulars would prefer this as it saves more of them from relegation at 33 games, and guarantees the second home game against bigger clubs. Also true of the below -

A 14-team Premiership splitting 8/6 after 26 matchdays, teams playing one another twice more, would give 40-game seasons for the top 8 and 36 game seasons for the bottom section.

The colts could be added as a Development League at the fifth tier, accessing the pyramid playoffs alongside the Lowland and Highland leagues.

With more promotion from the Championship to an expanded Premiership, or by expanding the Championship to 12 teams and using a split, votes would be garnered from those clubs.

Which would leave League One and Two clubs voting for a change that would see them boosted, either into an expanded Championship, or by participating in a larger SPFL that would consequently dilute their prospects of relegation to the non league.

[theboke]

I think it's a tightsrope, trying to find something to please everyone. Better to make a change here that some want and others don't mind about, then a laterr change there that others want and some don't mind about.

An 8/4 split in the Premiership with 40/36 games would likely have been tried already if the clubs thought it viable. It would give the teams in 7th and 8th at 33 games something more to play for, though, rather than prematurely cutting them off from a run at Europe when they're already safe from relegation in the usual Premiership scenario.

It would be good if they could just relax a little bit and relegate two automatically in a 12-18-18 set up. Make things open and straightforward. Play offs from 2nd-5th in the lower levels. Same thing in the Lowland and Highland. Allow teams freedom of movement, spreading the money more widely and giving supporters so many new fixtures to be excited about.

[SecretCEO]

I think it's do-able and affordable to expand the SPFL to 48 or 50 clubs, either 14-12-12-12 or 12-12-12-12.

The main element is to ask each individual division (Championship, League One, League Two) to divide its collective prize money by 12 clubs rather than 10 clubs, with that reduction in prize money income for each club being offset by the additional gate receipts from the extra home game that they each would gain from moving to a Premiership-style 12-team, 38-game division.

The second factor would be to keep all of the current promotion, relegation, and playoff arrangements between divisions exactly as they are. Including maintaining the present pyramid playoff system. There would need to be continuity with that part in order to keep stability for the other changes, and 12-team divisions with the familiar split and playoffs would hardly be less competitive than the three 10-team divisions that they'd be replacing.

That leaves the Premiership, which I think has the potential for change agreeable to all, as I described/explained in my previous post. The key thing is to be conservative with the promotion/relegation places, such as just two relegated from a 14-team Premiership, to help the smaller clubs establish themselves, whilst offering more of the Premiership regulars a guaranteed second home match against the bigger clubs. Which leaves the Old Firm to please. And that's an easy one.

Edited April 28, 2021 by SecretCEO

[theboke]

I can see the appeal to clubs of a revenue-neutral move of 2-8 places up the SPFL / away from the non-league. 

Yet I think that what the supporters and players relish is the opportunity to face new opponents more often. 

So maybe promoting 6-8 clubs into an SPFL with divisions of 12 or 14 would be the first step to giving the SPFL the airing that it needs, then moving to 3 divisions of 16-18 a few years thereafter.

Edited April 29, 2021 by theboke

[Cornishman]

Arguably, excluding the houghmagandy concerning the Arsecheeks' Colts, we have at long last the foundation assembled for a full Scottish football pyramid and I, for one, will be fascinated to see how its evolution unfolds... particularly in the next decade or so.

I think the first item on the agenda to which scrutiny should be paid is the transition from EoSFL/WoSFL conferenced divisions to the planned-for more linear models and then, the promotion/relegation arrangements selected between them (and indeed, throughout the whole Pyramid system.
My belief is that (i). every football division is healthiest when its churn/turnover in competitors is fixed between 20% & 25% ±1% each and every season (which includes the sum of both promotions & relegations); (ii). there should be an absolute minimum of two promotion places on offer in every such division, whether by direct means or via play-offs. -&- (iii). play-off places given should not exceed past the top 30% of competitors.
These 'rules' applied together can determine (so-called) 'perfect' divisional numbers & playing systems throughout any league ~ which conceivably could include some 24-team models similar to the Welsh Premier (to reduce number of necessary fixtures to 34) for divisions with three feeders. LL/HL - I'm looking at you!
I'm really unsure whether a completely linear league system should be the aim in the EoSFL & WoSFL ~ i.e. single divisions at every level, tiers 6 through 9/10. To my mind, having two parallel divisions from at least tier 8 would arguably be the way to go.

Once tiers 5 and down have settled into a more open, formal arrangement, I reckon it'll soon become abundantly clear that maybe twenty to thirty clubs beneath the 4th. tier either already are, or will soon become of a standard with very many of the SPFL's semi-pro outfits and I can see this allowing reconstructive expansion within the SPFL, presuming some competency develops within that organisation's marketing department, allowing for the fact that with more teams aboard, covering greater areas of the country, there'd be very much more for potential sponsors to find attractive.
I think the fully professional echelons will still remain as the top-two tiers, Premier at 12/14 teams, Championship possibly expanding to 18/20 teams and thus allowing the topmost semi-pro sides to mix-it with the big-boys. And over time, as in the English Pyramid, there'll be quite a few top semi-pro clubs who'll begin adopting full professional status. The English National League Premier is usually near-fully pro. Leagues 1 & 2, assuming both continue (I think L2 will disappear tbqh), would probably be best suited to being respectively 18 and 24-strong, the latter larger in order to provide for a possible four relegation places to LL/HL and competing in a model in which two conferences of twelve each  split into a top-6 & bottom-6... carrying-over H2H results the top-6's recombine to play all remaining Conf-1 vs. Conf-2 matches, home and away, giving a 34-game season. 
HL & maybe LL, playing the same League 2 model of fixtures, with three feeders apiece, would need dispensations to reduce their relegation zones to 3-down, with two play-outs versus the six tier 6 play-off competitors - essentially, similar to the Dutch play-off/play-out system.
Tiers 6 & downward would ideally be 16-team divisions, rising to 18 if having two feeders, which latter would also require dispensation for a play-off/play-out model.

 

OKAY. Rip me to shreds! 

[Gordon EF]

On 29/04/2021 at 08:01, theboke said:

I can see the appeal to clubs of a revenue-neutral move of 2-8 places up the SPFL / away from the non-league. 

Yet I think that what the supporters and players relish is the opportunity to face new opponents more often. 

So maybe promoting 6-8 clubs into an SPFL with divisions of 12 or 14 would be the first step to giving the SPFL the airing that it needs, then moving to 3 divisions of 16-18 a few years thereafter.

Looking at it from the point of view of...

• What has a chance of being voted for by Premier League clubs
• What has a chance of being voted for by Championship clubs
• What has a chance of being voted for by L1/L2 clubs
• What would cubs outside the pyramid want
• What would fans be happy with 
• What would represent an actually decent league structure?

It seems like any tier 1 bigger than 12 is a no-go at the moment so let's keep that at 12. I struggle to see enough Championship cubs supporting an expansion to 16. I think they'd probably support a 12 along the same lines as the Premier League. It gives full time clubs an extra safety net in terms of dropping to tier 3. And whilst it might reduce prize money per club, a couple of extra fixtures plus the semi-incentive of the bigger clubs paying each other at the end of the season might give it a bit of a 'something for everyone' element.

I think L1/2 clubs would accept bigger leagues and more sharing out of prize money if it meant less chance of being relegated to tier 5 and potentially more chance of being promoted to tier 2. If we could move towards 16-16 for tiers 3 and 4 or even 14-14 on the understanding that prize money in tier 4 would be pretty meagre but offer up two promotion places between tiers 5/4, 4/3, 3/2 plus pay offs, I think you'd be moving towards clubs potentially going for that.

I'd also introduce some form of travel expense payment for clubs in tier 4 travelling more than a certain number of miles per season.

[Eder]

We need to accept Scotland is a small nation and not much works for all and not much makes money.

While I don't fully support the Colt teams in the league the fact there is an issue with no reserve or U-21 league.

The best solution I see is having a Premiership 1 & 2 with 10 clubs each.   With the remaining 22 clubs making up another two leagues national Leagues.  There would need to be a better distribution of prize money among the 20 clubs but hopefully the settled set up would bring bigger sponsorships and TV deals.

Having two top leagues of 10 would give meaningful games in both divisions for clubs, fans and TV.  With a suggestion of two matches from PL1 and one PL2 shown weekly and not restricted to one broadcaster.

The problem with the 12 team league is it gives an imbalance of home and away  games.  In a league set up this should be avoided at all cost.

Unfortunately we don't have many options the bigger the league 18 or 20 attendances will drop dramatically and will not make money.

[Gordon EF]

On 04/07/2021 at 15:34, Eder said:

We need to accept Scotland is a small nation and not much works for all and not much makes money.

While I don't fully support the Colt teams in the league the fact there is an issue with no reserve or U-21 league.

The best solution I see is having a Premiership 1 & 2 with 10 clubs each.   With the remaining 22 clubs making up another two leagues national Leagues.  There would need to be a better distribution of prize money among the 20 clubs but hopefully the settled set up would bring bigger sponsorships and TV deals.

Having two top leagues of 10 would give meaningful games in both divisions for clubs, fans and TV.  With a suggestion of two matches from PL1 and one PL2 shown weekly and not restricted to one broadcaster.

The problem with the 12 team league is it gives an imbalance of home and away  games.  In a league set up this should be avoided at all cost.

Unfortunately we don't have many options the bigger the league 18 or 20 attendances will drop dramatically and will not make money.

Why on Earth would sponsorship increase for a 10+10 Premier League 1 and 2 over a 12+10 Premier and Championship?

It's the same teams. The quality wouldn't improve, the competitiveness of the top league wouldn't improve. It would provide no more quality or interest for viewers.

The solution to not having an u-21 league is having an u-21 league. It really shouldn't be beyond the wit of those involved to create a reserve or u-21 or u-23 league that actually works. The OF were moaning that they didn't face enough competition there. Which is a categorical lie, seeing as neither of them actually won the last incarnation and they were quite regularly beaten in it.

At the top end, Scottish football's main problem is the extreme uncompetitiveness of the league. In some ways that can't be helped but what we absolutely should not be doing is everything possible to make it even less competitive, which is what we seem to have been doing for the last 30 years.

[Eder]

4 hours ago, Gordon EF said:

Why on Earth would sponsorship increase for a 10+10 Premier League 1 and 2 over a 12+10 Premier and Championship?

It's the same teams. The quality wouldn't improve, the competitiveness of the top league wouldn't improve. It would provide no more quality or interest for viewers.

The solution to not having an u-21 league is having an u-21 league. It really shouldn't be beyond the wit of those involved to create a reserve or u-21 or u-23 league that actually works. The OF were moaning that they didn't face enough competition there. Which is a categorical lie, seeing as neither of them actually won the last incarnation and they were quite regularly beaten in it.

At the top end, Scottish football's main problem is the extreme uncompetitiveness of the league. In some ways that can't be helped but what we absolutely should not be doing is everything possible to make it even less competitive, which is what we seem to have been doing for the last 30 years.

Increased sponsorship as a result of increased attendance figures and interesting fixtures.

I believe costs is the reason for the Reserve/U21 Leagues being disbanded as club chose to invest in their first team

Unfortunately the gulf in income has made most leagues uncompetitive over the last 20-25 years.

I believe the 10 team league tiers suits Scottish Football and I hate the 12 team league with uneven home & away matches.

 

 

[HibeeJibee]

What anomalies the split throws up don't outweigh the negatives of dropping 2 clubs and cutting 2 games.

We've had this model for 22+ years. It's endured better than any other in history.

[Gordon EF]

27 minutes ago, Eder said:

Increased sponsorship as a result of increased attendance figures and interesting fixtures.

I believe costs is the reason for the Reserve/U21 Leagues being disbanded as club chose to invest in their first team

Unfortunately the gulf in income has made most leagues uncompetitive over the last 20-25 years.

I believe the 10 team league tiers suits Scottish Football and I hate the 12 team league with uneven home & away matches.

 

 

Why would there be increased attendances or more interesting fixtures though? The average attendance might go up because you're removing two clubs with below average attendance but sponsors simply won't be stupid enough to think that makes sponsoring the league more valuable. It doesn't actually mean more people through gates. There's been a handful of genuinely interesting premier league games in Scotland in my lifetime. Reducing the league back to 10 will leave it just as dull as it was the last time it was a 10 team league and just as dull as it has been since it went to 12. Nobody who doesn't support a Premier league team is interested in watching Premier league matches.

Then having no reserve team or u21 league was a choice taken by clubs. If it was actually that important, they'd have continued with it. It wasn't important to them. if East Fife can run an under 21 team (which they do), I'm sure the old firm, Aberdeen, Hibs, and Hearts can manage it.

Most leagues are far more competitive than the Scottish Premier. This isn't an "all leagues are the same" situation.

[HibeeJibee]

Off the top of my head these *12* proposals have all made it to some kind of formal stage during last 20 years plus a couple openly 'floated'.

I've probably forgotten some. More won't have made it that far.

That's without considering SPL2... EPL2... Atlantic League... nor more left-field situations like Falkirk chairman + Steven Pressley holding a press conference calling for 18/20-team SPL.

Every single example has failed.

Perhaps we should sense a trend here.
 

Quote

14-10-10-10     proposed by Rangers in early 2000s     2x non-league clubs added     SPL would have split 6/8 after 2 rounds for 36/40 games

14-10-10-10 or 14-14-14    proposed by SPL leadership in 2010     OF B teams added     SPL would have split 7/7 after 2 rounds for 38 games

10-10-12|12     proposed by SFA and SPL leadership in 2011     OF B teams added     SFL2 & SFL3 regionalised     SPL Cup in Middle East in winter break (OF exempt)
10-12-16|16     revised proposal     B teams of all SPL clubs + 2x non-league clubs added     SPL2 would have played 44 games

16-10-16     proposed by SFL leadership in 2012      Premier and National divisions would have played 30 games
16-10-18     revised proposal     OF B teams would have been added

12-12-18     proposed by SPL leadership in 2013     (top 2 tiers would have split 8-8-8 after 2 rounds for 36 games)

12-14-16 or 16-??-??     floated by SPL leadership in 2015 to speed Rangers return

12-10-10-12     proposed by Rangers & Celtic/Competitions Working Group in 2018     OF B teams added
12-10-10-10-10     revised proposal     new SPFL3 mixture of B teams and non-league clubs

14-10-10-10     proposed by Budge etc. in 2020     2x non-league clubs added      Premiership would have split 6/8 after 2 rounds for 36/40 games
14-14-14     revised proposal

12-10-10-16     floated by Rangers & Celtic/Brechin

12-12-12-12     proposed by Rangers & Celtic/Innovation Group in 2021      OF B teams and 4x non-league clubs added over 3yrs

Edited July 14, 2021 by HibeeJibee

[ahemps]

15 hours ago, Gordon EF said:

Most leagues are far more competitive than the Scottish Premier. 

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.

[Gordon EF]

4 minutes ago, ahemps said:

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.

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.