Jump to content

The SPFL recommendation?


Recommended Posts

Getting the impression that the primary worry of some Clyde fans is that their team are more likely to end up leaving a new bottom division by the trapdoor than the skylight  :whistle

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Genuine questions for Clyde fans.
All else aside do you like the set up of leagues of 10 that means playing teams 4 times?
What would be your ideal league set up?


What do most fans want?

Bigger leagues, more variety, not playing teams 4 (plus) times a season.

It’s well documented why the premier league can’t/won’t expand but that doesn’t apply to lower leagues.

Could easily have any of these models next season:
14-16-14
14-18-12
14-20-10

Or we could go 14-10-10-10 temporarily next season which doesn’t disadvantage anyone and actually put some thought into the best option longer term, without having it led by self interest.

Basing it on current standings is always going to be tricky. Why not come up with a suitable model and give teams a season to play for position in the hierarchy.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Getting the impression that the primary worry of some Clyde fans is that their team are more likely to end up leaving a new bottom division by the trapdoor than the skylight  :whistle
I'm getting the impression that teams untouched by this proposal don't care.

Although if there was any suggestion any change would effect their team negatively they would be outraged at it's unfairness.

Watch as Hearts, Thistle, Stranraer all vote for this proposal.

How can they claim putting Clyde etc into the bottom league is fairer than their poor teams being relegated on merit?
Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 minutes ago, haufdaft said:

I'm getting the impression that teams untouched by this proposal don't care.

Although if there was any suggestion any change would effect their team negatively they would be outraged at it's unfairness.

Watch as Hearts, Thistle, Stranraer all vote for this proposal.

How can they claim putting Clyde etc into the bottom league is fairer than their poor teams being relegated on merit?

059.thumb.jpg.6a22eba9d02a814643410022ddc83a4e.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

No.
I would prefer larger leagues as a principle.
 

I’ve got to be honest here guys, after you lot going on about your three World Cup wins against us this season I would be a little amused.
That said, I don’t think it will....or should...happen...
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Genuine questions for Clyde fans.
All else aside do you like the set up of leagues of 10 that means playing teams 4 times?
What would be your ideal league set up?
Personally speaking I see the current set up at the best.

Playing the same teams 4 times a year can be a bit tedious.

However the smaller leagues means most games are important for championship/playoff or relegation positions.

Bigger leagues mean more meaningless matches.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, roman_bairn said:


I’ve got to be honest here guys, after you lot going on about your three World Cup wins against us this season I would be a little amused.
That said, I don’t think it will....or should...happen...

If we had squeezed in the 4th game before the virus this might have all been a moot point 😄

I wish I had your optimism or faith in the decision makers. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If we had squeezed in the 4th game before the virus this might have all been a moot point [emoji1]
I wish I had your optimism or faith in the decision makers. 

I think when they get round to discussing the split of cash with the Premiership teams, it’ll start to unravel.
Could be wrong, just my expectations.....
Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, ribzanelli said:

Anyone who doesn’t want to use current standings to decide promotion/relegation but does want to use current standings to decide alignment in a reconstructed league is a total hypocrite 

People only seem to have these principles if the changes don't benefit their own club.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, C. Muir said:

Possibly. I just don't understand why, if Airdrie were in the position, their fans would be happy with the prospect of being put into the bottom tier when they're not currently. Especially when this proposal doesn't relegate teams who are actually bottom of their leagues. 

It's not the bottom tier. It's tier 3, which is where you are now. 

I don't support these proposals but Clyde fans saying it's relegation for them isn't exactly true.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, CALDERON said:

People only seem to have these principles if the changes don't benefit their own club.

 

The Clyde situation certainly shows how regardless of what happens at least one team will be disadvantaged. 

It's not hard to see why Clyde and their fans are concerned. They're going to lose out on potential revenue from Falkirk and Partick Thistle to go back to facing mediocre crowds from Edinburgh City, Annan and Elgin. Certainly seems to be easier to try harder for a club with a 16,000 average attendance compared to one with a sub 1000 average attendance. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 minutes ago, The Moonster said:

It's not the bottom tier. It's tier 3, which is where you are now. 

I don't support these proposals but Clyde fans saying it's relegation for them isn't exactly true.

Whilst the term relegation is perhaps not exactly true as you say, the outcomes of a normal relegation are what we would be on the end of if this was to happen.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It's not the bottom tier. It's tier 3, which is where you are now. 
I don't support these proposals but Clyde fans saying it's relegation for them isn't exactly true.
So if the proposed tier 3 isn't the bottom tier, what is the bottom tier?
Link to comment
Share on other sites

The Clyde situation certainly shows how regardless of what happens at least one team will be disadvantaged. 
It's not hard to see why Clyde and their fans are concerned. They're going to lose out on potential revenue from Falkirk and Partick Thistle to go back to facing mediocre crowds from Edinburgh City, Annan and Elgin. Certainly seems to be easier to try harder for a club with a 16,000 average attendance compared to one with a sub 1000 average attendance. 

Isn’t it the teams in League 2 that are pushing for this rather than the teams in the Premiership?…
Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, haufdaft said:
19 minutes ago, The Moonster said:
It's not the bottom tier. It's tier 3, which is where you are now. 
I don't support these proposals but Clyde fans saying it's relegation for them isn't exactly true.

So if the proposed tier 3 isn't the bottom tier, what is the bottom tier?

Tier 4 - LL and HL, tier 5 EOS, SOS and the new WOS leagues!!!!

Edited by honestman54
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...
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

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