Coefficientwatch

[EdTheDuck]

On 7/29/2018 at 10:29, glasgow-sheep said:

The sooner the biggest clubs feck off and form their own closed shop european superduper league the sooner we can restructure european football and return to a proper competition rather than a tv ratings event calender.

But that wouldn't be fair either.

Celtic wouldn't get a sniff of a European Super League, they'd be in some affiliated b*****d version of the Atlantic league along with their peers, big clubs from countries that don't have sufficient numbers of TV sets to be a "Global Brand".

And they'd be front of the queue wailing and gnashing their teeth at the inherent unfairness of it all.

[Marten]

None of the countries ranked 48th - 55th have any clubs left in any competition. Therefore the new bottom 4 is known. Gibraltar have overtaken Northern Ireland, meaning the Northern Irish champions will play in the CL preliminary tournament with the champions of Kosovo, Andorra and San Marino for 1 spot in the 1st qualifying round. They will also lose an EL spot, so they will only send 2 teams to the EL.

[wastecoatwilly]

2 hours ago, Monkey Tennis said:

They didn't do nothing.  They constituted a part of the competition that yielded a champion.

As you know, my difficulty doesn't particularly concern what Hamilton get - it concerns what Celtic will get in comparison to them. 

Again Celtic have too play 8 games to get the real dosh,doing all the hard work for the rest of Scottish premier teams,surely the 8 games has a price tag?

[wastecoatwilly]

10 hours ago, Yoda8 said:

Why is 19th place so important? 

For me it's the perception perceived by the country,the next time someone says Scottish football is rank or shite,you can say no we are above average across Europe as a footballing nation.
You have the super elite
 the elite
the above average
the mediocre
the below average
 the diddies
and the real diddies.
The perceived perception of the masses.

[Monkey Tennis]

47 minutes ago, wastecoatwilly said:

Again Celtic have too play 8 games to get the real dosh,doing all the hard work for the rest of Scottish premier teams,surely the 8 games has a price tag?

Some of us see things in terms of value, rather than price.

Was 1967's triumph seen in financial terms at the time?  Or does it perhaps resonate for other reasons?  I'm not sure that anyone attached a price tag to those games.

[Monkey Tennis]

11 minutes ago, wastecoatwilly said:

For me it's the perception perceived by the country,the next time someone says Scottish football is rank or shite,you can say no we are above average across Europe as a footballing nation.
You have the super elite
 the elite
the above average
the mediocre
the below average
 the diddies
and the real diddies.
The perceived perception of the masses.

 "perceived perception"

[wastecoatwilly]

46 minutes ago, Monkey Tennis said:

Some of us see things in terms of value, rather than price.

Was 1967's triumph seen in financial terms at the time?  Or does it perhaps resonate for other reasons?  I'm not sure that anyone attached a price tag to those games.

You know damn well your emphases on dosh in the game and the importance for it is very high on your list,for me it's probably mediocre on the perceived perception scale.
1967 was priceless.

Edited August 3, 2018 by wastecoatwilly

[ssdon]

Another good week for Scotland in Europe.

Was always going to be hard for the Dons, I thought we would have got points for a draw after 90mins but seems its been put down as a loss. 

Expected Celtic to go through but good wins for Hibs and Rangers.

[Monkey Tennis]

30 minutes ago, wastecoatwilly said:

You know damn well your emphases on dosh in the game and the importance for it is very high on your list,for me it's probably mediocre on the perceived perception scale.
1967 was priceless.

Of course I place emphasis on money given how much it's altered in recent decades and given the evidence of its impact.

When I do though, you and others attempt to justify it by pointing to how much other clubs might stand to get, or by identifying CL income as "rewards" or as a "price tag".  

As you acknowledge, truly meaningful achievements don't need such vulgar labelling.  

[wastecoatwilly]

29 minutes ago, Monkey Tennis said:

Of course I place emphasis on money given how much it's altered in recent decades and given the evidence of its impact.

When I do though, you and others attempt to justify it by pointing to how much other clubs might stand to get, or by identifying CL income as "rewards" or as a "price tag".  

As you acknowledge, truly meaningful achievements don't need such vulgar labelling.  

You believe that money has altered the game in recent decades with the impact of the coin?For me the powerhouse leagues across europe would still be at the top without the coin?

[JamesM82]

Ah, now that the actual football is over for another week, we can get back to the same old argument again.

[RedLichtie86]

Ah, now that the actual football is over for another week, we can get back to the same old argument again.

Wish they would just start another thread were they can have their pissing contest together

[Monkey Tennis]

13 minutes ago, JamesM82 said:

Ah, now that the actual football is over for another week, we can get back to the same old argument again.

Yes, the sums are finished for a bit.

If you don't like the bigger or more important questions relating to their significance, you'd maybe best stay away until the abacus needs to reappear.

[hellbhoy]

9 hours ago, RedLichtie86 said:

9 hours ago, JamesM82 said:

Ah, now that the actual football is over for another week, we can get back to the same old argument again.

Wish they would just start another thread were they can have their pissing contest together

Banning particular posters from a thread by some sort of democratic process might help. But then again I'd have no fucking thread to post on if such a thing was made possible.

[GordonS]

If the current qualification arrangements had been in place in 1984, for 84/85:

Aberdeen, Celtic, Dundee Utd and Rangers would all have gone straight into the Champions League group stage.

Dundee Utd were ranked 12th (same as Borrusia Dortmund now), Celtic 14th (now Liverpool) and Aberdeen 16th (now Zenit), so they would have been in the top two pots, though Aberdeen might have slipped into pot 3 if they were unlucky. Rangers, ranked 31st, would likely have been in pot 4.

Hearts and St Mirren would have gone straight into the Europa League group stage.

Hibs would have gone into Qualifying Round 2 of the Europa League.

 

We were good, man.

[Monkey Tennis]

6 hours ago, GordonS said:

If the current qualification arrangements had been in place in 1984, for 84/85:

Aberdeen, Celtic, Dundee Utd and Rangers would all have gone straight into the Champions League group stage.

Dundee Utd were ranked 12th (same as Borrusia Dortmund now), Celtic 14th (now Liverpool) and Aberdeen 16th (now Zenit), so they would have been in the top two pots, though Aberdeen might have slipped into pot 3 if they were unlucky. Rangers, ranked 31st, would likely have been in pot 4.

Hearts and St Mirren would have gone straight into the Europa League group stage.

Hibs would have gone into Qualifying Round 2 of the Europa League.

 

We were good, man.

Nice idea, but as you know, had current qualification rules been in place for some time by 1984, we'd be in nothing like such good shape.

Such rules have played a part in putting us where we are now, as of course has the break up of the Soviet Union and Yugoslavia.

And that of course comes before we recognise that even current rules wouldn't possibly allow us so many CL places, as our country boasts far too few TV viewers.

Edited August 5, 2018 by Monkey Tennis

[DiegoDiego]

Such rules have played a part in putting us where we are now, as of course has the break up of the Soviet Union and Yugoslavia.

Only one former Yugoslav league is ranked above us so that's made no difference. Even if a single Soviet league still existed we'd still be miles off an automatic Europa League place.

It's dropping behind the likes of Austria, Greece and Switzerland that's cost us, not the fall of communism. We've had far better Champions League access than Czechia for most of this century but we now find ourselves ranked way below them.

It's easy to blame UEFA for our downfall, and they are in a large part responsible, but there's certainly some introspection needed as well.

[Monkey Tennis]

2 minutes ago, DiegoDiego said:

Only one former Yugoslav league is ranked above us so that's made no difference. Even if a single Soviet league still existed we'd still be miles off an automatic Europa League place.

It's dropping behind the likes of Austria, Greece and Switzerland that's cost us, not the fall of communism. We've had far better Champions League access than Czechia for most of this century but we now find ourselves ranked way below them.

It's easy to blame UEFA for our downfall, and they are in a large part responsible, but there's certainly some introspection needed as well.

Do you not think that the huge increase in the number of countries in Europe has impacted on our standing then?

[Melanius Mullarkey]

2 minutes ago, Monkey Tennis said:

Do you not think that the huge increase in the number of countries in Europe has impacted on our standing then?

 

[DiegoDiego]

4 minutes ago, Monkey Tennis said:

Do you not think that the huge increase in the number of countries in Europe has impacted on our standing then?

In terms of club football, yes, it has impacted our standing, but only slightly. Take a quick look at the coefficients and see how many of these new countries are ranked above us. Not enough to make a meaningful impact in our participation (certainly compared to where we stood in 1990).