League Reconstruction 20/21 season

[ribzanelli]

Just now, Mr Positive, sometimes. said:

6/8 split. 

They'd play each other twice post split as well. 

The idea was shite though.

Well he did state that the bottom 7 play 4 additional games, not sure how we get there by playing other teams twice!

[Szamo's_Ammo]

On 26/09/2017 at 12:56, BACKOFTHENET said:

  Reveal hidden contents

 

British Football League Champions - Alternative History 1889 - 2017

 I took a few hours to do this. But I think it was worth it. 

This is looking at if the Scottish, English, Welsh, and Northern Irish Leagues did not exist, and instead the British League had started in 1889 with Scottish, Welsh, English and Irish (then Northern Irish after Irish independence) sides were allowed to join.

I do not support the Scottish, English, Welsh, and Northern Irish Leagues merging. I am an Aberdeen, and Inverness fan. We would do nothing in a modern day British League system nowadays. Plus Scotland would lose a major way of showing it’s identity to the rest of the world. But I have done this list to decide who would have been British champions in an age where the Scottish and English leagues merged.

I have also added a bit of couner history with the fact that if Northern Ireland has been part of a British League, the Northern Irish teams would have been bigger. Plus I have added an imaginary team called Dublin Irish Celtic United, to represent Republic of Ireland football before independence.

Plus I have taken into account, how much bigger sides from Scotland and Northern Ireland would be with British Premiership TV money.

 Year Champions -

1889 Preston North End.

1890 Preston North End.

1891 Everton

1892 Sunderland

1893 Sunderland

1894 Aston Villa

1895 Sunderland

1896 Aston Villa

1897 Aston Villa

1898 Glasgow Celtic

1899 Aston Villa

1900 Aston Villa

1901 Liverpool

1902 Sunderland

1903 Hibernian

1904 The Wednesday

1905 Newcastle United

1906 Liverpool

1907 Glasgow Celtic

1908 Manchester United

1909 Newcastle United

1910 Glasgow Celtic

1911 Manchester United

1912 Blackburn Rovers

1913 Sunderland

1914 Dublin Irish United

1915 Dublin Irish United

1916 Glasgow Celtic

1917 Glasgow Celtic

1918 Glasgow Rangers

1919 Glasgow Celtic

1920 Glasgow Rangers

1921 Glasgow Rangers

1922 Liverpool

1923 Glasgow Rangers

1924 Cardiff City

1925 Glasgow Rangers

1926 Huddersfield Town

1927 Newcastle United

1928 Glasgow Rangers

1929 Sheffield Wednesday

1930 Sheffield Wednesday

1931 Arsenal

1932 Motherwell

1933 Glasgow Rangers

1934 Belfast Celtic

1935 Arsenal

1936 Glasgow Celtic

1937 Manchester City

1938 Arsenal

1939 Everton

1940 - 46 WW2 (WW2 was 1939 - 45, but season could no start until 1946.)

1947 Liverpool

1948 Arsenal

1949 Portsmouth

1950 Hibernian

1951 Hibernian

1952 Manchester United

1953 Arsenal

1954 Wolverhampton Wanderers

1955 Aberdeen

1956 Manchester United

1957 Manchester United

1958 Heart of Midlothian

1959 Wolverhampton Wanderers

1960 Burnley

1961 Tottenham Hotspur

1962 Ipswich Town

1963 Everton

1964 Liverpool

1965 Manchester United

1966 Glasgow Celtic

1967 Glasgow Celtic

1968 Manchester City

1969 Leeds United

1970 Glasgow Celtic

1971 Glasgow Celtic

1972 Derby County

1973 Liverpool

1974 Linfield

1975 Derby County

1976 Liverpool

1977 Liverpool

1978 Nottingham Forest

1979 Liverpool

1980 Liverpool

1981 Aston Villa

1982 Liverpool

1983 Dundee United

1984 Aberdeen

1985 Aberdeen

1986 Liverpool

1987 Glasgow Rangers

1988 Liverpool

1989 Glasgow Rangers

1990 Glasgow Rangers

1991 Glasgow Rangers

1992 Glasgow Rangers

1993 Glasgow Rangers

1994 Manchester United

1995 Blackburn Rovers

1996 Manchester United

1997 Manchester United

1998 Linfield

1999 Manchester United

2000 Belfast Celtic

2001 Manchester United

2002 Arsenal

2003 Manchester United

2004 Arsenal

2005 Chelsea

2006 Chelsea

2007 Manchester United

2008 Glasgow Celtic

2009 Manchester United

2010 Chelsea

2011 Glasgow Rangers

2012 Manchester City

2013 Manchester United

2014 Manchester City

2015 Chelsea

2016 Glasgow Celtic

2017 Glasgow Celtic

 

Top teams in League.

 

All time list of record British League title winners.

1. Manchester United have 15 titles.

2. Glasgow Celtic have 14 titles.

2. Glasgow Rangers have 14 titles.

4. Liverpool have 13 titles.

5. Arsenal have 7 titles.

6. Aston Villa have 6 titles.

7. Sunderland have 5 titles

8. Chelsea have 4 titles.

8. Manchester City have 4 titles.

10. Everton have 3 titles.

10. Aberdeen have 3 titles.

10. Sheffield Wednesday have 3 titles.

10. Hibernian have 3 titles. 

IMO.

[Dons_1988]

"I took a few hours to do this"

[Golden Gordon]

5 minutes ago, Szamo's_Ammo said:

IMO.

I stopped reading after the guy said he was an Aberdeen & Inverness fan.

[Szamo's_Ammo]

12 minutes ago, Golden Gordon said:

I stopped reading after the guy said he was an Aberdeen & Inverness fan.

You missed the best part then.

On 26/09/2017 at 12:56, BACKOFTHENET said:

British Football League Champions - Alternative History 1889 - 2017

 I took a few hours to do this. But I think it was worth it. 

1998 Linfield

[Ric]

On a side note to that list, is it just me that cringes a bit when people use "Glasgow Celtic" and "Glasgow Rangers", it's not like we say "Liverpool Everton", "London Arsenal" or "Belfast Linfield". We know who these teams are, there is no need for the prefix. In fact the only time you ever need clarification is when some Southerner gets QPR and Rangers mixed up, but I know of nobody that calls QPR just Rangers.

[Golden Gordon]

1 minute ago, Szamo's_Ammo said:

You missed the best part then.

Dublin Irish United, Belfast Celtic??, The Wednesday, the Harlem Globetrotters?  What even is that?

[Dons_1988]

2 minutes ago, Ric said:

On a side note to that list, is it just me that cringes a bit when people use "Glasgow Celtic" and "Glasgow Rangers", it's not like we say "Liverpool Everton", "London Arsenal" or "Belfast Linfield". We know who these teams are, there is no need for the prefix. In fact the only time you ever need clarification is when some Southerner gets QPR and Rangers mixed up, but I know of nobody that calls QPR just Rangers.

Usually used by thicko OF pundits who want to glorify them as some mythical entities.

See also anyone who repeatedly says 'Heart of Midlothian'. 

[resk]

On a side note to that list, is it just me that cringes a bit when people use "Glasgow Celtic" and "Glasgow Rangers", it's not like we say "Liverpool Everton", "London Arsenal" or "Belfast Linfield". We know who these teams are, there is no need for the prefix. In fact the only time you ever need clarification is when some Southerner gets QPR and Rangers mixed up, but I know of nobody that calls QPR just Rangers.

Aye, its a minter. Although acceptable in the "We hate Glasgow Rangers, we hate Celtic too.... " song purely because it scans properly.

You don't hear said song much these days. Maybe it'll re-emerge now the Arabs are back in the top league?

[Billy Jean King]

Well lets your ideas people. 
We could go back to the old system of two leagues of 16 but what would you do with teams who have zero to play for. I mean if you have nothing to play for its simply boring.

We could just leave it as it is, only fans of a team concerned at not being promoted would be proposing reconstruction weeks before their season even begins.

[Aim Here]

20 minutes ago, resk said:

Aye, its a minter. Although acceptable in the "We hate Glasgow Rangers, we hate Celtic too.... " song purely because it scans properly.

You don't hear said song much these days. Maybe it'll re-emerge now the Arabs are back in the top league?

The song is still pretty common at Hibs games, as well as the more succinct "Glasgow Rangers - You let your club die".

Edited August 4, 2020 by Aim Here

[stu2910]

Any statistical experts fancy explaining to me why a bigger league creates more meaningless games? Surely the number of meaningless games depends entirely on the number of games played and therefore the total points available?

It would just mean that the meaningless games shifted to being say Dundee, Inverness, Hamilton and St Mirren in the middle of a 20 team league, instead of St Johnstone, Hibs, Arbroath and Dunfermline in the middle of their smaller leagues.

Fair enough Celtic are less likely to drop points against QOS than St Mirren, so the gap from top to bottom would likely be a bit bigger. By the same logic though, you’d expect Aberdeen to put up more of a challenge for the title with nearly half of their games now being against current championship sides. The OF generally demolish everyone anyway but you’d at least expect a closer challenge. Playing each other 4 times is one of the biggest reasons (that can change) that they dominate the league. You’re much more likely to see a smaller club cause an upset when they only need 2 good results instead of 4. You see it in the cup, how often does a smaller team play well and earn a replay only to be thrashed the next time?

[Green Day]

38 minutes ago, Dons_1988 said:

Usually used by thicko OF pundits who want to glorify them as some mythical entities.

See also anyone who repeatedly says 'Heart of Midlothian'. 

Its amusing in some contexts

[craigkillie]

1 minute ago, stu2910 said:

Any statistical experts fancy explaining to me why a bigger league creates more meaningless games? Surely the number of meaningless games depends entirely on the number of games played and therefore the total points available?

It would just mean that the meaningless games shifted to being say Dundee, Inverness, Hamilton and St Mirren in the middle of a 20 team league, instead of St Johnstone, Hibs, Arbroath and Dunfermline in the middle of their smaller leagues.

Fair enough Celtic are less likely to drop points against QOS than St Mirren, so the gap from top to bottom would likely be a bit bigger. By the same logic though, you’d expect Aberdeen to put up more of a challenge for the title with nearly half of their games now being against current championship sides. The OF generally demolish everyone anyway but you’d at least expect a closer challenge. Playing each other 4 times is one of the biggest reasons (that can change) that they dominate the league. You’re much more likely to see a smaller club cause an upset when they only need 2 good results instead of 4. You see it in the cup, how often does a smaller team play well and earn a replay only to be thrashed the next time?

The point is that in a bigger league there are fewer meaningful positions. In the current set-up, the meaningful positions are 1-5 and 11-12 in the Premiership, 1-4 and 9-10 in the Championship and League 1 and 1-4 and 10 in League 2. That gives you a total of 24 out of the 42 places in the SPFL which count for something, which means the vast majority of clubs have something to play for until very close to the end of the season (with the split in the Premiership also contributing to this).

If you instead had, say, a 20 team top flight and a 22 team second tier, say with 3 down from each division and an English style play-off system below, you'd have the meaningful positions being 1-5 and 18-20 in the Premiership and 1-6 and 18-20 in the Championship. That would only be 17 places across the SPFL which count for something.

[stu2910]

The point is that in a bigger league there are fewer meaningful positions. In the current set-up, the meaningful positions are 1-5 and 11-12 in the Premiership, 1-4 and 9-10 in the Championship and League 1 and 1-4 and 10 in League 2. That gives you a total of 24 out of the 42 places in the SPFL which count for something, which means the vast majority of clubs have something to play for until very close to the end of the season (with the split in the Premiership also contributing to this).
If you instead had, say, a 20 team top flight and a 22 team second tier, say with 3 down from each division and an English style play-off system below, you'd have the meaningful positions being 1-5 and 18-20 in the Premiership and 1-6 and 18-20 in the Championship. That would only be 17 places across the SPFL which count for something.

Fair enough I suppose. Interesting that before the playoffs were introduced, there would have been next to no difference.

[Monkey Tennis]

I was previously of the view that Darren was a daftie, rather than a troll.

This Celtic League stuff, to mirror what happens in rugby though?  Nah, he's at it.

[Tannadeechee]

1 hour ago, stu2910 said:

Any statistical experts fancy explaining to me why a bigger league creates more meaningless games? Surely the number of meaningless games depends entirely on the number of games played and therefore the total points available?

It would just mean that the meaningless games shifted to being say Dundee, Inverness, Hamilton and St Mirren in the middle of a 20 team league, instead of St Johnstone, Hibs, Arbroath and Dunfermline in the middle of their smaller leagues.

Fair enough Celtic are less likely to drop points against QOS than St Mirren, so the gap from top to bottom would likely be a bit bigger. By the same logic though, you’d expect Aberdeen to put up more of a challenge for the title with nearly half of their games now being against current championship sides. The OF generally demolish everyone anyway but you’d at least expect a closer challenge. Playing each other 4 times is one of the biggest reasons (that can change) that they dominate the league. You’re much more likely to see a smaller club cause an upset when they only need 2 good results instead of 4. You see it in the cup, how often does a smaller team play well and earn a replay only to be thrashed the next time?

See Scottish football before 1975. There were many, many meaningless games. Much like the English Premiership with teams playing out their games just for pride.

It was for this reason the 75-76 season moved to a 10 team league. This was due to crowds falling due to the number of meaningless games. It was felt that 10 teams with 2 being relegated kept the excitement going as teams would always be within European contention or fighting relegation if not going for the title. It did that until the shared gates were stopped and the rest is history.

[Monkey Tennis]

2 hours ago, Ric said:

I know of nobody that calls QPR just Rangers.

They were occasionally referred to that way in Steptoe and Son.

[vikingTON]

Can we stop having these recurring lectures about why the Scottish top flight changed to a ten team setup nearly fifty fucking years ago, as if it is in any way relevant to the (soon to be) three multi-entrant European competitions and widespread acceptance of end of season play-offs that would inform any new structure? 

You'd be as well telling us about how weans used to be sent up to clean the chimneys for all the relevance it has to the world in 2020. 

 

[BawWatchin]

2 hours ago, Ric said:

On a side note to that list, is it just me that cringes a bit when people use "Glasgow Celtic" and "Glasgow Rangers", it's not like we say "Liverpool Everton", "London Arsenal" or "Belfast Linfield". We know who these teams are, there is no need for the prefix. In fact the only time you ever need clarification is when some Southerner gets QPR and Rangers mixed up, but I know of nobody that calls QPR just Rangers.

I'm quite proud to refer to my club as Edinburgh Hibernian.   Scotland's only top tier club from the capital city. It's understandable that the idea of putting 'Paisley' in front of your club name would make you cringe though. The thought of it makes me cringe also.