10-team Divisions forever and a day?

[Kernovian]

Is the time rapidly approaching for a return to 18-team divisions beneath the Premiership, or at very least, beneath the Championship?

Wherever you ask, it seems that a majority of fans are roundly and soundly fed up of seeing the same opponents four times a season and would rather see more teams fewer times each season.

Of course, there's the 'meaningless midtable matches' idea to contend with, but tbh I've always thought that argument to be at least half-built on a fallacy, plus causes the loss of opportunity to field less senior players in order to 'blood' them and thus develop them under proper competitive conditions. Ten team divisions tend to show a pattern of teams being far more spread out points-wise with respect to their closest opponents, as well as those already large points gaps being much increased at both extremes of the table. They say that the ten team format ensures that the plupart of every club's games are 'more meaningful', but is this actually true? I don't think so because often those much-increased points gaps between sequentially placed teams mean that there's far less movement possible up or down the table based on individual rounds of matches - it's become a pretty sterile environment in respect of the weekly cut and thrust that makes other leagues so very fascinating. In England, for example, it's quite usual for there to be a half-dozen teams within one win of each other and not uncommon for a whole dozen to be hanging on a single position in the table from week to week throughout most of the season! Where do we get that kind of excitement North of the border? If lucky, we might get three or four teams hassling for a promotion place or against a relegation position, but even those pleasures mostly drop away toward the season's end.

I advocate a return to pre-'74 18-team division play, either in a 12*-12-18 format, or promoting six non-leaguers to make a 12*-18-18 shaped league.

* - acknowledging the very likely reluctance/inertia of the Premiership to change.

Indubitably top non-league outfits are becoming competitive enough to hold their own in an expanded SPFL and this is before a trickle of ambitious Juniors begin entering the seniors' ranks in the HFL (e.g. Banks O' Dee) & LFL (e.g. Kelty Hearts).

Brora Rangers, Buckie Thistle, Cove Rangers, Cumbernauld Colts, East Kilbride & Spartans would not look out of place in a League One competition of 18 teams (there would no longer be a League Two, of course). Such a division would easily bear two relegation positions, possibly allowing automatic promotion for HFL/LFL champions thereafter.

Thoughts?

 

[beefybake]

My gut reaction is that a return to the 18 team division would just highlight all the shortcomings that were present at the time.

12, 14, 16.... something could be worked out, better than the current 10 team thing.

[Sergeant Wilson]

The danger might be that the top two, probably, full time divisions would be well placed to cut the rest adrift of the professional part of the game.

[Nowhereman]

49 minutes ago, Kernovian said:

Is the time rapidly approaching for a return to 18-team divisions beneath the Premiership, or at very least, beneath the Championship?

Wherever you ask, it seems that a majority of fans are roundly and soundly fed up of seeing the same opponents four times a season and would rather see more teams fewer times each season.

Of course, there's the 'meaningless midtable matches' idea to contend with, but tbh I've always thought that argument to be at least half-built on a fallacy, plus causes the loss of opportunity to field less senior players in order to 'blood' them and thus develop them under proper competitive conditions. Ten team divisions tend to show a pattern of teams being far more spread out points-wise with respect to their closest opponents, as well as those already large points gaps being much increased at both extremes of the table. They say that the ten team format ensures that the plupart of every club's games are 'more meaningful', but is this actually true? I don't think so because often those much-increased points gaps between sequentially placed teams mean that there's far less movement possible up or down the table based on individual rounds of matches - it's become a pretty sterile environment in respect of the weekly cut and thrust that makes other leagues so very fascinating. In England, for example, it's quite usual for there to be a half-dozen teams within one win of each other and not uncommon for a whole dozen to be hanging on a single position in the table from week to week throughout most of the season! Where do we get that kind of excitement North of the border? If lucky, we might get three or four teams hassling for a promotion place or against a relegation position, but even those pleasures mostly drop away toward the season's end.

I advocate a return to pre-'74 18-team division play, either in a 12*-12-18 format, or promoting six non-leaguers to make a 12*-18-18 shaped league.

* - acknowledging the very likely reluctance/inertia of the Premiership to change.

Indubitably top non-league outfits are becoming competitive enough to hold their own in an expanded SPFL and this is before a trickle of ambitious Juniors begin entering the seniors' ranks in the HFL (e.g. Banks O' Dee) & LFL (e.g. Kelty Hearts).

Brora Rangers, Buckie Thistle, Cove Rangers, Cumbernauld Colts, East Kilbride & Spartans would not look out of place in a League One competition of 18 teams (there would no longer be a League Two, of course). Such a division would easily bear two relegation positions, possibly allowing automatic promotion for HFL/LFL champions thereafter.

Thoughts?

 

That's just nonsense. there have been several occasions over the last few years where virtually every club in League One in particular have gone into April with something to play for. You might find playing the same team four times a year boring but for competition a ten team division together with play offs virtually guarantees it

[Nowhereman]

7 minutes ago, Sergeant Wilson said:

The danger might be that the top two, probably, full time divisions would be well placed to cut the rest adrift of the professional part of the game.

And they would. As i mentioned on another thread if Dumbarton go down this year to be replaced by Raith/Ayr it would be the first time in many years , if not ever, that the second tier was entirely full time. An ideal opportunity for them to pull up the drawbridge.

[Ranaldo Bairn]

Bollocks OP, bollocks.

The benefit of small divisions playing opponents > twice is that a relatively brief, intense run of form can completely transform a season. Multiple times over the years teams have plummeted to disaster (a la Raith) or hauled themselves from nowhere to safety or promotion (St Mirren, Brechin) over fairly short periods.

14 wouldn't bother me at all. 16 maybe do-able, but 18 or more would be absolute torture for everybody involved. They were got rid of for good reason, one main one being the drop out of the top tier was catastrophic financially. At least now we have a far more even spread of clubs and finances throughout the league.

PS don't compare to English leagues please, especially when it's unadulterated drivel like the below:

" it's become a pretty sterile environment in respect of the weekly cut and thrust that makes other leagues so very fascinating. In England, for example, it's quite usual for there to be a half-dozen teams within one win of each other and not uncommon for a whole dozen to be hanging on a single position in the table from week to week throughout most of the season! Where do we get that kind of excitement North of the border?"

[Clayhole Blue]

1 hour ago, Kernovian said:

Is the time rapidly approaching for a return to 18-team divisions beneath the Premiership, or at very least, beneath the Championship?

Wherever you ask, it seems that a majority of fans are roundly and soundly fed up of seeing the same opponents four times a season and would rather see more teams fewer times each season.

Of course, there's the 'meaningless midtable matches' idea to contend with, but tbh I've always thought that argument to be at least half-built on a fallacy, plus causes the loss of opportunity to field less senior players in order to 'blood' them and thus develop them under proper competitive conditions. Ten team divisions tend to show a pattern of teams being far more spread out points-wise with respect to their closest opponents, as well as those already large points gaps being much increased at both extremes of the table. They say that the ten team format ensures that the plupart of every club's games are 'more meaningful', but is this actually true? I don't think so because often those much-increased points gaps between sequentially placed teams mean that there's far less movement possible up or down the table based on individual rounds of matches - it's become a pretty sterile environment in respect of the weekly cut and thrust that makes other leagues so very fascinating. In England, for example, it's quite usual for there to be a half-dozen teams within one win of each other and not uncommon for a whole dozen to be hanging on a single position in the table from week to week throughout most of the season! Where do we get that kind of excitement North of the border? If lucky, we might get three or four teams hassling for a promotion place or against a relegation position, but even those pleasures mostly drop away toward the season's end.

I advocate a return to pre-'74 18-team division play, either in a 12*-12-18 format, or promoting six non-leaguers to make a 12*-18-18 shaped league.

* - acknowledging the very likely reluctance/inertia of the Premiership to change.

Indubitably top non-league outfits are becoming competitive enough to hold their own in an expanded SPFL and this is before a trickle of ambitious Juniors begin entering the seniors' ranks in the HFL (e.g. Banks O' Dee) & LFL (e.g. Kelty Hearts).

Brora Rangers, Buckie Thistle, Cove Rangers, Cumbernauld Colts, East Kilbride & Spartans would not look out of place in a League One competition of 18 teams (there would no longer be a League Two, of course). Such a division would easily bear two relegation positions, possibly allowing automatic promotion for HFL/LFL champions thereafter.

Thoughts?

 

So often seems to be fans of teams from a higher division coming on to restructure the lower divisions....

FWIW - I don't like the 4 times a season thing, but I also don't want an 18 team league. 

[rhliston]

Personally think 3 Leagues of 14 each, everybody pays each other home and away then top 7 spilt off to play each other home and away gives a total of 38 games a season. Bottom team automatically relegated, Champions of the 2 Leagues below Premier gain promotion. 2nd bottom team in the top 2 Leagues involved in playoffs with teams 2to 4 in the League below. 

Automatic relegation for the team that finishes 14th in the bottom League to be replaced by winners Highland League/Lowland League playoff. 

[Sergeant Wilson]

7 minutes ago, rhliston said:

Personally think 3 Leagues of 14 each, everybody pays each other home and away then top 7 spilt off to play each other home and away gives a total of 38 games a season. Bottom team automatically relegated, Champions of the 2 Leagues below Premier gain promotion. 2nd bottom team in the top 2 Leagues involved in playoffs with teams 2to 4 in the League below. 

Automatic relegation for the team that finishes 14th in the bottom League to be replaced by winners Highland League/Lowland League playoff. 

Why should last place in L2 get a play off?

[Cowden Cowboy]

Why should last place in L2 get a play off?

Because that is what the 42 SPFL clubs agreed to when they agreed to a pyramid system. Why shouldn't it is equally as valid a question? There is a different play off arrangement at top of Championship - so no one size fits all.

[Sergeant Wilson]

8 minutes ago, Cowden Cowboy said:

Because that is what the 42 SPFL clubs agreed to when they agreed to a pyramid system. Why shouldn't it is equally as valid a question? There is a different play off arrangement at top of Championship - so no one size fits all.

I know that, it's a principle I don't agree with.

I've never been convinced 2nd bottom in other divisions should get a potential reprieve, never mind last.

[Clyde01]

I have often suggested 12-12-18 as a model that could work. Promoting 6 more non-league sides to increase the numbers just wouldn’t fly, the bigger clubs want less diddies, not more!

The whole thing about the top 2 tiers drawing up the bridge or breaking away just shouldn’t be allowed to happen, don’t see how having 2 more clubs in the championship makes that scenario more likely than the current setup either.

A league of 18 merging leagues one and two would work imo. Playing teams 4 times is dull and often due to postponements you get ridiculous scenarios like playing the same opponent twice or even three times in as many weeks.

Financially there is less reliance on leeching off big clubs at our level so playing twice instead of 4 times wouldn’t make much difference.

Attendances might actually improve as often fans don’t bother making an away trip if there will be another chance later in the season. Visiting each ground once per season would be more appealing.

The original poster is clearly exaggerating the movement/static argument but by giving an automatic relegation spot and playoff places at both ends of the table the league could remain pretty competitive all season.

What are the compelling arguments against this model?

[Ranaldo Bairn]

Let's say two or three clubs are fighting to avoid the drop. Maybe half a dozen fighting for whatever promotion/playoff slots are on the go.

There's half your league with nothing to play for from about this time of year. Great.

[Clyde01]

It’s unlikely the gaps would be so big that half the league would have nothing to play for.

For me the chance to visit many more away grounds rather than a smaller amount more regularly would make away games more appealing.

The only real downside would be the loss of a trophy that sides currently winning league two achieve. However, it’s hardly a major honour.

[lichtgilphead]

1 hour ago, Clyde01 said:

It’s unlikely the gaps would be so big that half the league would have nothing to play for.

For me the chance to visit many more away grounds rather than a smaller amount more regularly would make away games more appealing.

The only real downside would be the loss of a trophy that sides currently winning league two achieve. However, it’s hardly a major honour.

Try getting promoted. eight of our nine away league venues changed this year. 

Even better, if Edinburgh and Cowdenbeath win a few games, Clyde may have 15 new venues to visit next season 

ETA I forgot about Cumbernauld Colts. Only 14 'new' venues then

[Clyde01]

Try getting promoted. eight of our nine away league venues changed this year. 
Even better, if Edinburgh and Cowdenbeath win a few games, Clyde may have 15 new venues to visit next season 
ETA I forgot about Cumbernauld Colts. Only 14 'new' venues then

League reconstruction will probably be our best bet of moving up a tier [emoji23]

[tamthebam]

Unfortunately the plans for league reconstruction seem to be based on 10-10-10 and 10 + 2 bumcheeks who are to be included for "the good of Scottish football"

[Ray Vaughn]

16-16-10 and no Colt teams like ever!!!!

[grazza]

Premier - 12 teams. Given monopoly at the top don't think making it bigger will do much and has no chance of getting voted to. Ideally would like to see 2 automatic relegation slots though

Championship - Expansion to 12 teams and possibly similar split scenario could make title, play off and relegation battles more interesting with teams playing teams around them at the end of the season. If 11th prem team auto relegated I'd have teams 3rd v 4th in play off semi and runner up plays winner. Likewise bottom 2 in championship should go down automatically if 12 team league. Ideally we want an environment that encourages teams to sustain full time with training and benefits for young players. If you go much bigger I think gates will fall and clubs like Morton, Raith, QOS Morton, Livingston  etc probably more likely to go and stay part time and gulf between it and top league would be massive. 

Below that I would like to see a hybrid system of teams in a league play each other once home and away but north and south conferences so they play teams in their own area an additional game home and away. Whether you do that tier 3 and 4 or just in tier 4 but something like this for teams just out highland/lowland would be better.  Highland and Lowland Champs shoudl eb getting automatic promotion maybe some sort of play off spot for runners up. 

No to Colt teams for sure in all senior competitions. 

[Doonhamer doon south]

On 02/02/2018 at 13:25, Nowhereman said:

That's just nonsense. there have been several occasions over the last few years where virtually every club in League One in particular have gone into April with something to play for. You might find playing the same team four times a year boring but for competition a ten team division together with play offs virtually guarantees it

Yeah I have to agree with this. This season and last has been extremely competitive in the championship, with teams constantly swapping places in the playoffs. My own club are competing for playoff places, whilst also looking nervously over our shoulders at Dumbarton and falkirk. 

 

I am a fan of increased numbers in the divisions as  my reasons would be to reduce fixtures against the same opponents and to open up room for some of the big junior/lowland/highland clubs to come across with their decent fan bases (junior) and different opposition. However if the price is to lose the competitive nature of the seasons then I would rather not change. The trickle effect of the juniors is a start and I am sure they will naturally rise to the appropriate level over time, as will current spfl clubs sink to their appropriate level. (Nothing harshly meant by that). 

 

I think the next change in Scottish football is either creation of a West league or to change the relegation/promotion at bottom of league 2. I have no proposal however I not 100% behind the current set up.