Junior football, what is the future?

[Guest]

Evidence is there, eg as I said, 4 Angus clubs in League One.
Came from the horses mouth, former director of Arbroath.

There are always going to be examples but 4 doesnt mean it's the way forward.

[Doonhamer1969]

7 minutes ago, Gordon EF said:

You've lost me?

As has been mentioned previously in this thread, Brechin are shite because of the prevailing mentality that 'central belt players are better'.

As had also been pointed out by others, those 'Central belties' have got the club relegated twice in succession, and possibly a third time on the immediate horizon.

With League's 1 and 2 regional, there ought to be more of a focus on localism (without parochialism) .  More local derbies, bigger crowds, more cash to buy Aberdeen, Dundee etc rejects instead of Airdrie and Falkirk rejects, ie better quality players, keener to sign on part time contracts etc etc.

[Doonhamer1969]

6 minutes ago, Footballfirst said:

Is that self isolation on a regional basis? 

'Its a local virus for local people. Nothing for you city types here'

[Gordon EF]

6 minutes ago, Doonhamer1969 said:

No, just lower tiers.

OK, so realistically there comes a certain point in the structure where regionalisation is preferable because clubs don't have the resources to justify travelling further distances. My point is, how are we deciding that comes at tier 3 in the current structure?

Most clubs in tiers 3 and 4 are currently in central Scotland. Depending on the make up of the leagues in a particular season, regionalisation could involve more travelling for some clubs. If we did it with a moving border, that border will always be in the central belt, meaning local clubs will almost certainly be divided away in different leagues.

[Doonhamer1969]

15 minutes ago, G4Mac said:

20 minutes ago, Doonhamer1969 said:

Evidence is there, eg as I said, 4 Angus clubs in League One.
Came from the horses mouth, former director of Arbroath.

There are always going to be examples but 4 doesnt mean it's the way forward.

True, but as a general principal it works.

Which crowd is bigger ?

Peterhead v Elgin or Peterhead v Stranraer ?

Obviously the former.

Edited March 8, 2020 by Doonhamer1969

[Gordon EF]

2 minutes ago, Doonhamer1969 said:

As has been mentioned previously in this thread, Brechin are shite because of the prevailing mentality that 'central belt players are better'.

As had also been pointed out by others, those 'Central belties' have got the club relegated twice in succession, and possibly a third time on the immediate horizon.

With League's 1 and 2 regional, there ought to be more of a focus on localism (without parochialism) .  More local derbies, bigger crowds, more cash to buy Aberdeen, Dundee etc rejects instead of Airdrie and Falkirk rejects, ie better quality players, keener to sign on part time contracts etc etc.

I'm pretty sure there's no mentality that central belt players are better, there's just an awful lot more of them.

Brechin have been relatively successful and punching above their weight for the last 20 years. But they have afew shite seasons and suddenly they're evidence that we need regionalisation? That makes no sense.

[Doonhamer1969]

Just now, Gordon EF said:

OK, so realistically there comes a certain point in the structure where regionalisation is preferable because clubs don't have the resources to justify travelling further distances. My point is, how are we deciding that comes at tier 3 in the current structure?

Most clubs in tiers 3 and 4 are currently in central Scotland. Depending on the make up of the leagues in a particular season, regionalisation could involve more travelling for some clubs. If we did it with a moving border, that border will always be in the central belt, meaning local clubs will almost certainly be divided away in different leagues.

Yes, there's a risk of that.

If we had around 40 full-time teams in 3 professional leagues, I'd say regional at Tier 4, but we don't.

Hence Tier 3.

Only my opinion, if those clubs in Leagues 1+2 don't want it, then fine, it doesn't happen.

I just think its worth examining.

[Doonhamer1969]

1 minute ago, Gordon EF said:

I'm pretty sure there's no mentality that central belt players are better, there's just an awful lot more of them.

Brechin have been relatively successful and punching above their weight for the last 20 years. But they have afew shite seasons and suddenly they're evidence that we need regionalisation? That makes no sense.

I'm not basing it purely on Brechin, just giving one example.

Highland and Lowland are regionalised, part time teams.

Is there a massive difference between Formartine and Queen's Park (random examples) ?

See no reason why League 1 and 2 shouldn't be regional.

[Doonhamer1969]

6 minutes ago, Gordon EF said:

I'm pretty sure there's no mentality that central belt players are better, there's just an awful lot more of them.

Brechin have been relatively successful and punching above their weight for the last 20 years. But they have afew shite seasons and suddenly they're evidence that we need regionalisation? That makes no sense.

Re mentality, my team has barely any local players.

There is certainly the mentality there that CB players are better.

Queen's training is in Glasgow.....

Edited March 8, 2020 by Doonhamer1969

[Gordon EF]

Just now, Doonhamer1969 said:

Yes, there's a risk of that.

If we had around 40 full-time teams in 3 professional leagues, I'd say regional at Tier 4, but we don't.

Hence Tier 3.

Only my opinion, if those clubs in Leagues 1+2 don't want it, then fine, it doesn't happen.

I just think its worth examining.

if the geography of Scotland was different, then regionalising at the point where the FT/PT split comes in makes sense. But the reality is that 12 of the current 20 League 1/2 clubs are based in a relatively small geographical area across central Scotland. 3 are just outside the belt (the Angus clubs) with only 3 relatively far North and 2 relatively far South.

Regionalising the 3rd and 4th tier is coming up with a solution to a problem that doesn't exist.

[Gordon EF]

8 minutes ago, Doonhamer1969 said:

Re mentality, my team has barely any local players.

There is certainly the mentality there that CB players are better.

Queen's training is in Glasgow.....

Yes, because by opening up the option of signing central belt players, there are many more players available. It's simple numbers.

Of course a central belt 11 would be much better than a D&G 11.

[Marten]

Can we talk about junior football here again? This regionalisation of the SPFL keeps coming back here, but is massively off-topic. That should be discussed in the appropriate subforum, not here.

[Doonhamer1969]

4 minutes ago, Gordon EF said:

if the geography of Scotland was different, then regionalising at the point where the FT/PT split comes in makes sense. But the reality is that 12 of the current 20 League 1/2 clubs are based in a relatively small geographical area across central Scotland. 3 are just outside the belt (the Angus clubs) with only 3 relatively far North and 2 relatively far South.

Regionalising the 3rd and 4th tier is coming up with a solution to a problem that doesn't exist.

4 and half hours of travelling, time costs etc.

[Gordon EF]

12 minutes ago, Doonhamer1969 said:

I'm not basing it purely on Brechin, just giving one example.

Highland and Lowland are regionalised, part time teams.

Is there a massive difference between Formartine and Queen's Park (random examples) ?

See no reason why League 1 and 2 shouldn't be regional.

If we're talking about capability to play in a national tier then yes, there are some significant differences between some HL/LL clubs and SPLF clubs. There's a massive difference between, Dalbeattie Star and East Fife or Fort William and Dumbarton.

[Doonhamer1969]

1 minute ago, Marten said:

Can we talk about junior football here again? This regionalisation of the SPFL keeps coming back here, but is massively off-topic. That should be discussed in the appropriate subforum, not here.

Apologies if its off topic.

My rationale was that it links in terms of the juniors joining a system where they are one tier closer to the top.

[Guest]

True, but as a general principal it works.
Which crowd is bigger ?
Peterhead v Elgin or Peterhead v Stranraer ?
Obviously the former.

Yep again one example. To counter that argument, bonnyrigg vs Talbot, kelty vs pollok etc

[Burnie_man]

32 minutes ago, Marten said:

Can we talk about junior football here again? This regionalisation of the SPFL keeps coming back here, but is massively off-topic. That should be discussed in the appropriate subforum, not here.

I heartilly recomment this thread for the purpose of SPFL reconstruction chat  

 

Edited March 8, 2020 by Burnie_man

[Le Tout P'ti FC]

I'm not basing it purely on Brechin, just giving one example.
Highland and Lowland are regionalised, part time teams.
Is there a massive difference between Formartine and Queen's Park (random examples) ?
See no reason why League 1 and 2 shouldn't be regional.

One of them easily knocked a rancid Queen of the South XI out of the Scottish Cup this seaaon, and the other could have done so, but didn't get a chance to?

[marconi]

just heard there is a P WG  arranged for this week .  is this true?

[Marshmallo]

4 minutes ago, marconi said:

just heard there is a P WG  arranged for this week .  is this true?

Nope. I can see why Ronney and Johnston got you to post that though, try and get clubs not to complete their application forms on Thursday cause there's a fabricated PWG meeting "this week".