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

[The Grass Is Greener.]

3 hours ago, bennett said:

You're just kicking up a fuss because its a bear who posted it.

 

 

 

Fucking hell

[CityDave]

I thought FB's post could have been worded better but QotS have made a good impression on him and its nice to see fans of much bigger clubs praising the smaller teams and .....it just makes the world a better and nicer place to be in.

Bennett's attempts are predictable and boring and shows he is very much out of his depth outside the BRALT and its satellite threads.

 

[forever_blue]

28 minutes ago, hellbhoy said:

And you are just kicking up a fuss because a bear is getting it.

I am not getting anything , it has been a fairly civil discussion in all fairness , points put across and opinions explained . All very refreshing 

[hellbhoy]

19 minutes ago, forever_blue said:

I am not getting anything , it has been a fairly civil discussion in all fairness , points put across and opinions explained . All very refreshing 

Yes it was FB, but benny the ball seen something else and made a cnut of it in the process.

[Davie Bhoy]

Yes, occasionally the split can produce the excitement that it was introduced to do, but more often than not it throws up more problems than it merits. I could list loads of problems with the split & general dislikes too.

For me, we should go for a 16-14-14 set-up.

2 automatically relegated/promoted with the 3rd bottom team going into the play-offs with the teams in 3rd-5th from the league below.

Have a pyramid system at the bottom with 1 team automatically relegated from the 2nd tier & the team in 13th playing off for survival with the team(s) looking to get into the professional set-up.

This only gives us 30 games & 28 games in the league set-up but change the league cup to be 11 groups of 4 with winners going into the last 16 with the 5 best runners up.

[ropy]

Are you suggesting changing the League Cup to a group structure?

[CityDave]

20 hours ago, Davie Bhoy said:

Yes, occasionally the split can produce the excitement that it was introduced to do, but more often than not it throws up more problems than it merits. I could list loads of problems with the split & general dislikes too.

For me, we should go for a 16-14-14 set-up.

2 automatically relegated/promoted with the 3rd bottom team going into the play-offs with the teams in 3rd-5th from the league below.

Have a pyramid system at the bottom with 1 team automatically relegated from the 2nd tier & the team in 13th playing off for survival with the team(s) looking to get into the professional set-up.

This only gives us 30 games & 28 games in the league set-up but change the league cup to be 11 groups of 4 with winners going into the last 16 with the 5 best runners up.
 

All teams in the SPFL are professional.

 

[Davie Bhoy]

Are you suggesting changing the League Cup to a group structure?

Yes. Different to the one we have just now. 11 groups of 4 playing home & away. All regional based so the 4 teams in Glasgow would be in a group, then you'd prob have Morton, St Mirren, Kilmarnock & Ayr Utd in the other etc.

I'd include all 44 clubs in it & play it at the start of the season.

All teams in the SPFL are professional.

 

Yes I know, I'm talking about the teams from the league below the 2nd tier as I would have it in my suggestion. Although technically in that argument, Queens Park are still amateurs.

[Rugster]

8 minutes ago, CityDave said:

Technically you are correct about Queen's Park but there are no amateur teams currently in the SFPL and to further than no amateur teams in the Highland League, though I don't know about the Lowland League but I would assume most if not all are pro or semi pro. Same would go for most of the clubs in the EoS and SoS leagues, then there are the Juniors and I certainly wouldn't describe the top leagues in the East and West as amateur, I don't know about further down. The North Juniors I know the vast majority are amateur though I'm not sure about the three or four very top teams. Just saying that you would have to go quite far down the ladder to find a few genuine amateur teams in Scotland.

If ever a post could be described as a word salad, this is the one.

[CityDave]

22 minutes ago, Rugster said:

If ever a post could be described as a word salad, this is the one.

Damn it, apologies.

 

[Rugster]

8 minutes ago, CityDave said:

Damn it, apologies.

 

Don't let it happen again.

[CityDave]

52 minutes ago, Davie Bhoy said:

 

 

Yes I know, I'm talking about the teams from the league below the 2nd tier as I would have it in my suggestion. Although technically in that argument, Queens Park are still amateurs.

I'm quite sure all the teams right down into the lowest juniors or the smallest teams in the SoS League are set up as professional/semi pro clubs with a very few exceptions. I know the Highland League doesn't have any amateur clubs.

[CityDave]

Just now, Rugster said:

Don't let it happen again.

Sorry boss, post has been redone pruned and tidied.

[Davie Bhoy]

The split is shite

I used to run a supporters bus when I lived in England. We could plan our games 4-6 weeks in advance. Come the split, if you were given a home game straight away, you were left rushing about at the last min trying to book buses, accommodation, tickets, time off work.

Many of our bigger clubs, Celtic, The Rangers, Aberdeen, Hearts & Hibs have supporters clubs in England etc and the split is a pain for them.

Plus look at the carry on this season with Partick Thistle & other clubs being disadvantaged by fewer home games v Celtic & Rangers. A league should feature every club playing an equal number of home and away games.

[EdTheDuck]

On 04/08/2016 at 12:05, Davie Bhoy said:

Yes, occasionally the split can produce the excitement that it was introduced to do, but more often than not it throws up more problems than it merits. I could list loads of problems with the split & general dislikes too.

For me, we should go for a 16-14-14 set-up.

2 automatically relegated/promoted with the 3rd bottom team going into the play-offs with the teams in 3rd-5th from the league below.

Have a pyramid system at the bottom with 1 team automatically relegated from the 2nd tier & the team in 13th playing off for survival with the team(s) looking to get into the professional set-up.

This only gives us 30 games & 28 games in the league set-up but change the league cup to be 11 groups of 4 with winners going into the last 16 with the 5 best runners up.
 

The split was never introduced to produce excitement, it was a practical solution to a fixture problem i.e. not enough dates for a 44 game season

If the split had been set up for the high stake games it throws up on a fairly regular basis maybe the dimwits that run our game could market that fact but because they are dimwits they don't.

If and when we get a 16/18 team league you will likely have old duffers like Walter Smith lauding a "proper" league but being at a loss for words as attendances begin to decline also on a fairly regular basis

[Davie Bhoy]

The split was never introduced to produce excitement, it was a practical solution to a fixture problem i.e. not enough dates for a 44 game season

If the split had been set up for the high stake games it throws up on a fairly regular basis maybe the dimwits that run our game could market that fact but because they are dimwits they don't.

If and when we get a 16/18 team league you will likely have old duffers like Walter Smith lauding a "proper" league but being at a loss for words as attendances begin to decline also on a fairly regular basis

I don't see why attendances would decline in a 16 team league.

[rambling syd rumpo]

22 hours ago, EdTheDuck said:

The split was never introduced to produce excitement, it was a practical solution to a fixture problem i.e. not enough dates for a 44 game season...

True, but it's only part of the story. The breakaway clubs couldn't simply walk out of the Scottish Football League. They had to give two (I think) years notice and clubs that resigned from the league would have lost the registrations of their players. The clubs left behind therefore had to approve the terms under which the breakaway clubs could leave with the approval of the SFL. One of those conditions was that the SPL would have to expand to 12 clubs by 2000. The SPL really didn't want that, for obvious practical reasons. 44 games were too many. 33 games with everyone playing each other 3 times (like the old SFL Div 1 & 2 in the 1980s) would have been a ridiculous lottery, and so the SPL were forced to swallow the split. No-one wanted it, but it allowed everyone to get what they did want.

[HibeeJibee]

That's correct, see p1... Remember that in 1998 they were only 4yrs in from reducing from 12 to 10. It was a sop to the "big" clubs who weren't in the Premier Division at the time, and in some quarters the 44/33 issue was viewed as throwing spanners in SPL works.

None of that takes away the fact it allows for 12-team division or makes the mid-table more exciting, tbf.

[Monkey Tennis]

The important point is that it was brought in to allow twelve sides to compete over a manageable number of games.

Things like the battle for a top six place, or the fact that the run-in produces head to heads, are really just by-products of that fact.

Plenty smaller countries have such things and it's largely fair.  Play-offs were not however introduced in order to create more excitement.  The suggestion that that was the rationale, is simply wrong.

[EdTheDuck]

On 08/08/2016 at 00:43, Davie Bhoy said:

 

I don't see why attendances would decline in a 16 team league.

 

Individual games won’t see attendances fall in a 16 team league; for example there’s no reason to suppose that if Dundee-v-Partick attract 4,500 in a 12 team league that it would attract any fewer in a 16 team league (unless of course Dundee go into a terminal decline – the performance of individual clubs will affect attendances more than the league structure).

But in a 16 team league, however you slice it, teams will play more games against teams with smaller travelling supports and fewer games that attract the occasional fans & big-game Charlies. It may not be a disastrous fall in numbers but it will be a fall.