Jump to content

SPFL split . . . Is it time to revert back to a traditional league format?


Recommended Posts

You have just opened up a bag of worms there. :lol:

Now that the Govan globetrotters have reached the top flight there will be no effing chance of that ever, the SPFL only sell one fixture to the TV market and to hell with the rest.

I'd prefer the old format of play each team twice, home & away, but others will argue that it creates too much of a points gap and that the split offers more excitement??? apparently after a particular time through the season there is nothing to play for for the clubs stuck in the middle of the table.

Best to offer an incentive to lower placed clubs, 5 points a win if you beat any club sitting in the top five positions and the top five clubs only gain 2 points for a win in any game, that might add some action to the points difference argument, especially a the start of the season. :lol:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

"Change back" to what? There are 2 different options.

We have a split because in 1998 the big clubs wanted to break away, but didn't want to serve however many years notice were required under SFL rules. Therefore a deal was struck to allow it to happen immediately. That deal included an "Annual Settlement" payment of £1.8M (or whatever it was) from SPL to SFL; continued SPL participation in the League Cup, which remained an SFL competition and was run by a joint committee with equal SPL & SFL representation; and as a sop to the clubs not forming the SPL right away the terms had a requirement for the top division to return to 12 clubs from 2000. It had been so until 1995, when 12-12-14 changed to 10-10-10-10 to reduce the total matches from 44 / 39 to 36.

However by this time it was virtually impossible (as it remains today) to accommodate 44 matches. Indeed supposedly one of the reasons for SFL and some of its clubs insisting on a return to 12 was also to lumber SPL with exactly this issue. Their solution was the split for an ideal total of 38 matches. It had the useful aside - which has proven to be correct - that it would make the middle of the table more meaningful, and generate lots of head-to-heads in the last month of the season. Many would argue that's now a justification in and of itself.


Return to the initial question though - what is the OP wanting to "change back" to?

Options are 12-team Premiership playing 44 games, or 10-team Premiership playing 36 games.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I quite like the split, the United-Aberdeen game a few years ago on MD33, which was basically a winner takes all (for sixth) since Killie didn't beat Dundee, was one of the most exciting games I've ever been to. 

The #scenes when Rory Boulding scored. Skip to 4:20

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, HibeeJibee said:

"Change back" to what? There are 2 different options.

We have a split because in 1998 the big clubs wanted to break away, but didn't want to serve however many years notice were required under SFL rules. Therefore a deal was struck to allow it to happen immediately. That deal included an "Annual Settlement" payment of £1.8M (or whatever it was) from SPL to SFL; continued SPL participation in the League Cup, which remained an SFL competition and was run by a joint committee with equal SPL & SFL representation; and as a sop to the clubs not forming the SPL right away the terms had a requirement for the top division to return to 12 clubs from 2000. It had been so until 1995, when 12-12-14 changed to 10-10-10-10 to reduce the total matches from 44 / 39 to 36.

However by this time it was virtually impossible (as it remains today) to accommodate 44 matches. Indeed supposedly one of the reasons for SFL and some of its clubs insisting on a return to 12 was also to lumber SPL with exactly this issue. Their solution was the split for an ideal total of 38 matches. It had the useful aside - which has proven to be correct - that it would make the middle of the table more meaningful, and generate lots of head-to-heads in the last month of the season. Many would argue that's now a justification in and of itself.


Return to the initial question though - what is the OP wanting to "change back" to?

Options are 12-team Premiership playing 44 games, or 10-team Premiership playing 36 games.

Hi HB,

On another similar type thread I had put forward that I'd prefer 3 leagues, 2 leagues of 16 and 1 league of 10 and then came your reply. Sensible and well thought out and similar to the post above, I couldn't argue with your reasoning for meaningful games near the end of the season.

I had some time to ponder on your meaningful games, especially near the end of the season games and your right if every club had something to play for even in mid table then it creates something fans want to go to.

If it were up to me I'd have a top flight of 16 clubs to counter another argument, playing each other club too many times a season. Downfall number 1?, the decreased lack of revenue from the possible 4 extra home fixtures. Then I'd have a second tier league of 16, and this is where I feel something else could theoretically give every club something to play for no matter where they are in the division even up to the last game. After both leagues have completed their 30 fixtures in the leagues a grouped cup competition is created and takes place but only for those two leagues and is included within the season ticket for the group stages taking the total of games on a season ticket to 36 games. The cup draw takes place before the season begins and by four pots. Balls number 1 to 8 are in pot one, balls numbered 9 to 16 are in pot two etc until there are four pots with 8 balls each numbered up to 32. The balls are the placings in the league and each placing will end up resulting in which group the clubs will eventually end up in by their eventual position in the league.

Clubs and fans now know throughout the season who resides in which group at any given time but is not the final group opponents but adds to the fun or conspiracy if a club loses to avoid some tough opponents in the grouped cup competition.

I'd personally make these grouped cup fixtures points paying results to be added to the respective clubs league tally. Another added bonus to relegation promotion or title winning contenders that these group games also affect their final league points tally and come with even more meaning in two competitions at the very same time. This now gives two more differing venues added to the season adding more variety to away fixtures visiting more grounds. The top two from each group progress to the knock out phase and there ends the leagues season after the grouped stages of the twinned competitions. No play off fixtures either as the grouped stage would be considered effectively play off ties and any club still in the knock out stages of the cup could end up with a fixture pile up if having to play a play off fixture or two.

Points in the grouped stages, seeds 1 & 2 can only take 2 points from beating seeds 3 or 4, but can take the 3 points from each other, a total of 14 points possible. Seeds 3 & 4 can take 3 points from each other and seeds 1 & 2, a total of 18 points possible.

Some argument maybe about cross pollinating the two divisions?, as the new league cup format has shown there can be a few shockers for bigger clubs. I think putting the two leagues against each other at the end of the season as clubs are possibly peaking or needing some boost or incentive could end up with some unbelievable outcomes. Imagine the 32nd rank club ruined some other clubs chances of winning the top tier?

Prize money from the knock out stages of the cup are shared accordingly across the two leagues and all the clubs.

Adds an extra cup for the top 32 clubs, gives enough games for an ST of 36, random outcomes and possibilities even near the end of the league season.

Now tell that doesn't offer a lot of possibilities and variety and a lot of meaningful fixtures right up to a knock cup phase?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yeah SPFL chat is the sign of an utter moron, which you've already proven you are, please try and improve this.

The split is great and, more often than not, allows teams something to play for right up until it takes place. Last season there was about five sides all fighting for one spot come the final few games.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yeah SPFL chat is the sign of an utter moron, which you've already proven you are, please try and improve this.

The split is great and, more often than not, allows teams something to play for right up until it takes place. Last season there was about five sides all fighting for one spot come the final few games.

And as for your moron comment. . . The topic was more than enough to comment on. Jog on.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Which 'one' season was that? 



Last season. I agree that the playoffs now add a little more excitement. However if clubs are aspiring to make it to the top of the bottom six then they deserve to be in the bottom six. As for the premiership comment. . . Would the English premiership even contemplate in putting such a ridiculous structure in place. . . Don't think so!
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, RandomGuy. said:

Yeah SPFL chat is the sign of an utter moron, which you've already proven you are, please try and improve this.

The split is great and, more often than not, allows teams something to play for right up until it takes place. Last season there was about five sides all fighting for one spot come the final few games.

Fighting for what though? The chance to play your last 5 games against better teams and finish with less points than the team in 7th place. Ridiculous.

Bigger league please. Home and away once. This set up is so boring.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

22 minutes ago, mart1 said:

 


Last season. I agree that the playoffs now add a little more excitement. However if clubs are aspiring to make it to the top of the bottom six then they deserve to be in the bottom six. As for the premiership comment. . . Would the English premiership even contemplate in putting such a ridiculous structure in place. . . Don't think so!

 

Who 'aspires' to be top of the bottom six, pre split? Names and references please.

woulds the English Premiership split into a top 10 and bottom 10, if you give them enough money, of course they would. I'm fairly certain the bottom 4 would damn site like to play the other bottom six on the run in rather than the top 4. It's not a difficult situation to apprehend.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...