League Reconstruction 20/21 season

[welshbairn]

3 minutes ago, EdTheDuck said:

They've also got much better youth development, of course. (that went astray somewhat for a few years judging by the decline of the Dutch national team, although they seem to be on the road back)

You're points, however, stand up against similar sized countries (Denmark, Switzerland, Austria)

I watched a third tier game in Amsterdam a couple of years ago, made Clach v Strathspey Thistle games look professional. The old reason given for why Dutch football was so much better than us was that far more of them played football than went to watch. Think that's now reversed.

[EdTheDuck]

By the way...

The 16/18 team league proponents often suggest that the enlarged mid-table full of meaningless games allow for 'blooding youth' but bottom end of of a top six and especially top end of a bottom 8 allows this in fucken spades. The slight advantage a 14/6-8 split offers in some meaningful games in the run-up to the split...

[Sinner-to-Saint]

11 minutes ago, Jacksgranda said:

There's a lot more than 64 senior teams already.

Okay, I meant SPFL clubs! LOL

[Ray Patterson]

1 hour ago, Nightmare said:

A closer comparison to how our Premiership would look with a bigger league would be the Portuguese Primeira Liga. Like the Dutch, Portugal currently has an 18-team setup, but also has a far bigger disparity in attendances from the top teams to the bottom half. Half the top flight Portuguese clubs average under 4k, and I'd guess that without Benfica, Porto and Sporting's large away supports many of them would be struggling to even hit the 2k mark.

This. I watched Pacos vs Benfica on the TV a few months ago, and from the TV pictures it looked like Pacos gave Benfica 3 of the 4 stands in the ground. The ground itself only held about 9,000.

 

[Green Day]

According to a statement by Hearts (yes, another day another statement) the sentence quoted below - which was actually spoken by Ann Budge in a R5 interview - has more than one meaning.

[vikingTON]

15 hours ago, Mr. X said:

The vote should never have happened. It was never going to go the way of the minority of clubs that would suffer the most. The majority were always going to say f**k them I'm alright jack.  Hearts would have no doubt been the same if they were higher up the table, but it still doesn't make it right. 

Wait so because Hearts weren’t going to win the vote shouldn’t have taken place?

 The simple facts are that holding a vote wasn’t even necessary: the SPFL board could have called all four leagues weeks ago and you’d have no grounds to challenge it. They instead organised a vote to ensure that any decision also had the approval of a vast majority of its member clubs - which it now has.

I’m really not sure what Hearts as a club think that they have to gain from regurgitating this i) shite and ii) already lost argument though.

3 hours ago, Falcor Roar said:

The two things aren't remotely comparable. In one case we have a club who overspent, went bust and demanded to keep their place at the top table as though nothing had happened. In the other case we have a club who would be relegated before the full season has been completed due to a global pandemic. There will be an element of sympathy for Hearts at boardroom level but not on football fan forums and the like. Reconstruction will stand or fall on whether it makes sense for clubs rather than any chairman holding the view that hearts/thistle etc deserve their fate. 

There were some chairmen who took a principled stance from the outset against sevco rejoining the top flight. Quite rightly as it was an abomination. There were others who were strong armed by fan pressure to reject their admittance to the top flight and then subsequently the first division. Those clubs then did infact make a decision based on finances when faced with a boycott from fans. 

 

It’s got very little to do with previous behaviour and everything to do with how clubs like Hearts respond right now. The more that they flail and whine about decision that more than 75% of clubs at every level voted in favour of, the fewer supporters they’ll get from the same constituency for immediate league reconstruction. While the financial self interest factor of a 12 v 14 league is far less significant than what was at least portrayed for Sevco not being in the top two divisions. So goodwill towards the most affected clubs will play a key role in determining the vote - it’s not as if the likes of Albion Rovers or Celtic are clinging onto a slight change of structure between the top two tiers to stay alive.

[Sergeant Wilson]

51 minutes ago, honestman54 said:

I think it did back then but im thinking that with the pyramid coming in there are a developing number of potential quality which need space to grow in a larger league set up.  Im still in for 16-14-14.

That's a step back from the rabid "da's" harking back to the good old days. I agree your suggestion would be good, but 14 would be the absolute limit in the top division. I probably give the impression of being a bit elitist and protecting the big clubs but we are stuck with how things have developed over the last 40 years.

The only thing that will radically change the set up would be a few clubs going belly up or Rangers and Celtic finding an escape route.

[Granny Danger]

15 minutes ago, Green Day said:

According to a statement by Hearts (yes, another day another statement) the sentence quoted below - which was actually spoken by Ann Budge in a R5 interview - has more than one meaning.

There will be a film or a TV mini-series about this fiasco at some point.

Adam Faith should portray Ann Budge and Ian Cuthbertson should have to role of Neil Doncaster.

Both these actors are dead but that shouldn’t matter.

[Jacksgranda]

1 hour ago, Sergeant Wilson said:

People calling for an 18 team top division have a romantic notion of how it used to be. It was changed for a reason. The reasons not to have it have been compounded by changes in wider society. The novelty will wear off quickly and the argument that must-have teams can "blood youths" is fine in theory, but will enough people pay about £25.00 to watch it.

An 18 team division also creates a low quality second tier that the 18 would be terrified to drop into because of the disastrous financial consequences.

In the bad old days, which I fondly remember as it's all I knew, whenever a "big" team e.g. Motherwell, Partick, St Mirren, even Falkirk and Airdrie, f****** up and managed to get themselves relegated, they usually strolled the lower division. Inevitably one of the promoted duo got relegated e.g. East Stirlingshire, Ayr United, Hamilton Academical, Arbroath, Cowdenbeath - Raith Rovers and Dumbarton managed a couple of sesons before going back down (although Dumbarton technically weren't relegated) - along with a.n other (usually Stirling Albion until they gave up trying to get promoted).

Even Morton, St Johnstone and Clyde were yo-yo clubs late 50s, early 60s. QoS also were usually relegation fodder on their odd trips upstairs, iirc.

I'm sure if there were two big divisions again, a "big" team going down would waltz away with Division Two. However, because of the change in football finances - bosmans, pre contracts, European money etc, there are never going to be two big divisions.

[Sergeant Wilson]

1 minute ago, Jacksgranda said:

In the bad old days, which I fondly remember as it's all I knew, whenever a "big" team e.g. Motherwell, Partick, St Mirren, even Falkirk and Airdrie, f****** up and managed to get themselves relegated, they usually strolled the lower division. Inevitably one of the promoted duo got relegated e.g. East Stirlingshire, Ayr United, Hamilton Academical, Arbroath, Cowdenbeath - Raith Rovers and Dumbarton managed a couple of sesons before going back down (although Dumbarton technically weren't relegated) - along with a.n other (usually Stirling Albion until they gave up trying to get promoted).

Even Morton, St Johnstone and Clyde were yo-yo clubs late 50s, early 60s. QoS also were usually relegation fodder on their odd trips upstairs, iirc.

I'm sure if there were two big divisions again, a "big" team going down would waltz away with Division Two. However, because of the change in football finances - bosmans, pre contracts, European money etc, there are never going to be two big divisions.

Airdrie and Killie went down and back up together in the early seventies. Airdrie won the league scoring, according to wiki 102 goals (I'm sure it was 108).

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/1973–74_in_Scottish_football

 6 to 8 goal wins weren't unusual. It was brilliant, unfortunately times change.

[vikingTON]

Direct comparisons between an 18 team league in the 1960s and a new form are ridiculous: bear in mind this was an era in which 'straight up, straight down' promotion and relegation was taken as a Gospel truth and European qualification was based a lot more on cup success than league placings. You could have an 18 team league with extensive play-offs for European spots as well as relegation that would keep the number of dead rubber games to a healthy level.

Despite all the standard assumptions in Scottish football, that number does not actually equal 'as close to zero as possible'. There is a benefit in having a relatively stable mid-table that allows clubs to do some long term planning for a change. It also opens more opportunities for younger players to gain first team action in the closing weeks of the season and reduces the need for clubs to throw money at 'experienced campaigners' - disinterested, mercenary journeymen - during the January transfer window.

An 18 team league(s) is highly unlikely to be the next step but it shouldn't be dismissed out of hand as a future model based on what happened in an entirely irrelevant bygone era.

 

Edited April 18, 2020 by vikingTON

[bennett]

51 minutes ago, Bohemian said:

I started all this Dutch football chat off ha. I wasn't trying to compare the two really, was just pointing out how they set up an18 team league. Dutch football is obviously in a better place than us for several reasons. As you said having a football mad country with 3 times our population is a good start 

You're as a changeable as the weather with your opinions mate.

 

1 hour ago, coprolite said:

Aberdeen v Killie seems a funny one to use as an example. Neither in any real danger of relegation, so a bigger league wouldn't change that. 

We also used the same shitfest tacticts against Dumbarton, who wouldn't be in a 20 team top tier. 

Btw i'm fairly ambivalent about how the league is set up, and would probably have been for it a couple of of months ago, but folk arguing against 18 teams are convincing me more than those arguing for expansion. 

Hibs are a side who I'd have thought would thrive in a larger league. Sure they have a few cloggers but they mostly like to play football but each to their own.

Killie v sheep was used as it will forever haunt my memories.  

 

1 hour ago, Bohemian said:

Simply Translated... " it's no fair teams didnt roll over for the mighty sevco, only show in town, WATP" 

Your team has been utter dugshite from January HTH Vicky.

That post bears absolutely no relevance to my post at all, are you on the firewater again?

 

[AFCDannyFTH]

If the games are to be played behind closed doors, the league or clubs should look to introduce a digital season ticket where the games can be streamed from home.

UEFA and the UK’s blackouts would surely be suspended until the situation improves?

Obviously you wouldn’t be able to charge the same sort of prices, but the savings on police, stewards etc would likely go a decent way to make up for the difference.

[Bohemian]

1 minute ago, bennett said:

You're as a changeable as the weather with your opinions mate.

 

Hibs are a side who I'd have thought would thrive in a larger league. Sure they have a few cloggers but they mostly like to play football but each to their own.

Killie v sheep was used as it will forever haunt my memories.  

 

That post bears absolutely no relevance to my post at all, are you on the firewater again?

 

Didnt read but I expect it's just more lies

[EdTheDuck]

2 minutes ago, AFCDannyFTH said:

If the games are to be played behind closed doors, the league or clubs should look to introduce a digital season ticket where the games can be streamed from home.

UEFA and the UK’s blackouts would surely be suspended until the situation improves?

Obviously you wouldn’t be able to charge the same sort of prices, but the savings on police, stewards etc would likely go a decent way to make up for the difference.

https://www.independent.co.uk/sport/football/premier-league/coronavirus-3pm-tv-blackout-uefa-behind-closed-doors-a9446886.html

 

[Jacksgranda]

3 minutes ago, Sergeant Wilson said:

Airdrie and Killie went down and back up together in the early seventies. Airdrie won the league scoring, according to wiki 102 goals (I'm sure it was 108).

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/1973–74_in_Scottish_football

 6 to 8 goal wins weren't unusual. It was brilliant, unfortunately times change.

Arbroath and Dumbarton would have been the favourites for the drop that season. 

Dunfermline also went down/up at the start of the 70s, and then dumped into the new first division.

[bennett]

4 minutes ago, AFCDannyFTH said:

If the games are to be played behind closed doors, the league or clubs should look to introduce a digital season ticket where the games can be streamed from home.

UEFA and the UK’s blackouts would surely be suspended until the situation improves?

Obviously you wouldn’t be able to charge the same sort of prices, but the savings on police, stewards etc would likely go a decent way to make up for the difference.

Sounds workable in principle , an online or tv season ticket for games.

But if one player or member of the coaching staff then the entire squad is isolated for two weeks.  I've a feeling that we're fcuked until they come up with a vaccine for this.

 

[vikingTON]

The most crucial point IMO is that league reconstruction should not happen with immediate effect but rather come into effect after the 20/21 season. There is no valid basis on which to lift 2nd placed teams from a current play-off spot only into the league above. Instead, clubs should know exactly what they are competing for and finish in the appropriate spots in the league next season to win promotion. So if you want a 14 team top flight then there should be two automatic spots and a 3rd v 4th play-off final in the Championship next season, with 12th going down as usual; the same would apply down the pyramid with LL and HL champions going up automatically and the runners-up playing off for the chance to relegate the bottom feeder of the SPFL.

This principle should be the acid test for members of the task force: if you are committed to reconstruction for the greater good of Scottish football then having a season to fully implement those changes is not an issue. If you start havering about how it needs to take place now, now, now then you're simply interested in saving your own club's skin from a deserved relegation and should have all your contributions filed in the bin where they belong.

[CambieBud]

Have a 14 team Premier Division by all means but split it into Premier A and Premier B sections. The A section would be limited to Glasgow clubs and B the rest. The Bigot brothers could then play each other every other week and Sky would be creaming their y-fronts at the prospect.

This is the answer. Hopefully Premier A teams just F off somewhere and leave the rest of us to it

[RandomGuy.]

30 minutes ago, Granny Danger said:

There will be a film or a TV mini-series about this fiasco at some point.

I'm almost certain there was a "Sunderland til I die" type show being filmed about Hearts this season.

It was mentioned in our match thread v them when Levein was punted.

Aye - https://www.heartsfc.co.uk/news/article/inside-tynecastle-documentary

Edited April 18, 2020 by RandomGuy.