Future progression and development of the WOSFL

[Pyramidic]

26 minutes ago, LongTimeLurker said:

Think a Lowland League 2 but with east and west sections would be ideal to get rid of pro/rel bottlenecks. It won't be long until enough west clubs would be licensed for that to be realistic and it would help to get all the clubs that operate with six figure budgets at the professional game board level where they belong. A way needs to be found to move the SoS down the pecking order a bit to a level where its clubs are keen to move up when the opportunity arises and an LL2 west might be a better fit on that than the LL.

On the plus side it perhaps would get rid of the bottlenecks. On the minus side it basically just reconfigures the EOSFL Premier and WOSFL Premier and dilutes the EOSFL and WOSFL as flagship competitions.

Not sure that those administering the EOSFL and WOSFL  would wish to see their competitions diluted just to accommodate weaker clubs in LL that inevitably will be dropping down the Pyramid in the near future.

[AlanCamelonfan]

24 minutes ago, Pyramidic said:

On the plus side it perhaps would get rid of the bottlenecks. On the minus side it basically just reconfigures the EOSFL Premier and WOSFL Premier and dilutes the EOSFL and WOSFL as flagship competitions.

Not sure that those administering the EOSFL and WOSFL  would wish to see their competitions diluted just to accommodate weaker clubs in LL that inevitably will be dropping down the Pyramid in the near future.

That's why I said lowland league 2 would be the option but teams would need to be licensed.

People are trying to run before they can walk. Assumption of the west steamrolling it with clubs like pollok not even at stage or licence

[theesel1994]

What was the Lowland League's response the last time when change was beings asked of them?

When the Juniors were trying to join the Pyramid as a whole, Lowland League West and Lowland League East was Option Z........how did that go down with the Lowland League?

I know this is different proposal but I can't see why they would want to change their format.

[LongTimeLurker]

21 minutes ago, theesel1994 said:

....When the Juniors were trying to join the Pyramid as a whole, Lowland League West and Lowland League East was Option Z........how did that go down with the Lowland League?...

The LL membership rejected it, but some SFA and SJFA people appeared to have been expecting that option to go ahead so there must have been somebody prominent from the LL involved who was at the very least receptive to the concept (was told who that was by PM at the time but won't name names). In the post above I was suggesting an LL 2 east and an LL 2 west at tier 6 rather than having the split at tier 5 (same sort of concept as the Nationwide Conference then Nationwide North and South in England), so it's mainly about finding a way to move the SoS down a tier. That way you have only two divisions feeding into the top LL division at tier 5 rather than three so it is easier to have the two champions from the east and west automatically promoted into tier 5.

Edited March 14, 2021 by LongTimeLurker

[FairWeatherFan]

4 minutes ago, theesel1994 said:

What was the Lowland League's response the last time when change was beings asked of them?

When the Juniors were trying to join the Pyramid as a whole, Lowland League West and Lowland League East was Option Z........how did that go down with the Lowland League?

I know this is different proposal but I can't see why they would want to change their format.

Option Z was splitting at Tier 5 creating 3x feeders to the SPFL.

Which is a bit different to adding LL2 feeder leagues at Tier 6. I think that might be more of a problem with the SFA. We've seen how they're limiting the JPP. So adding another 16/32 clubs to that won't be encouraged by them. Also, when the SFA changing their voting rights I think that was tied to Professional Game Board leagues rather than Tiers as originally suggested. Which might be another problem from an SFA pov.

According to TJ's minutes of the last PWG meeting, the LL weren't keen on any of the 4 options suggested. Having previously voted unanimously against the West Region & East Region entering intact at Tier 6. Instead the LL suggested the creation of an independent WoSFL.

Outside of that you're going back to 2018 where there was an initial look at additional relegation at their AGM (which was held before the EoSFL had their AGM that year) and a LL2 working group put together around October 2018. With such a small membership it's a little hard to judge what the current membership might thinking since Berwick Rangers, Bo'ness United, and Bonnyrigg Rose have been added and Selkirk and Whitehill Welfare are no longer members. With potential turnover to occur if this season is completed. 

[Pyramidic]

These comments that I made another thread are also relevant here.

It does make a lot of sense incorporating the name of the town or settlement in the club title.

I think that we will see more Youth set-ups applying to the EOSFL and WOSFL. They are very different from the general football model. Most will trace their origins to a few dads that wanted to establish a Youth side for their sons. One team subsequently grew into two teams and the club then begins to mushroom and we have say 20 or 30 teams or perhaps more.

Money can be raised with enthusiastic mothers an fathers. Sponsors arrive from all sorts of directions. Grants are available from local councils and other funding bodies.

The club becomes recognised as a community service. The downside arrives when players are 16 or 18 and the more talented ones migrate to Junior/Senior clubs. A few may remain with the club and progress into Men’s amateur football.

It is natural for those administering the club to consider at some stage creating a pathway to Senior football. This can be achieved with a partnership with a Senior club or by taking the difficult route of applying to the EOSFL or WOSFL and upgrading facilities as appropriate.

In most cases the level of support for a newly created Senior side is likely to be very poor at the outset. Interested family members and a few youngsters who play for youth sides is probably the most that can be expected to attend games.

However, providing that players are not paid it does not really matter. It may be possible to bring in older more experienced amateur players to swell the ranks but there is always the possibility of a clash of cultures.

A Youth club following the Senior route can over time have built up a lot of assets from grants and membership/monthly fees (say 700 players paying say £25 annual membership and £20 monthly training/match fees). Some money may be left over for important development projects! Then add the fund raising and sponsorship elements. Whilst some youth set-ups will struggle others will not.

The point I am making is that the funding model (assuming it works successfully) is very different for a Youth club that moves to Senior football. It will not work if the club is simply going to rely on its local support base in terms of matchday attendances.

A successful Youth club who establishes a Senior side in my view represents a positive element for the future of the EOSFL and WOSFL . However, it does need to be carefully assessed by the respective league officials to make sure that league criteria can be properly met and the applicants proposals are truly sustainable.

[parkcircus]

Great post and very accurate 

[Hillonearth]

6 hours ago, Pyramidic said:

These comments that I made another thread are also relevant here.

 

It does make a lot of sense incorporating the name of the town or settlement in the club title.

I think that we will see more Youth set-ups applying to the EOSFL and WOSFL. They are very different from the general football model. Most will trace their origins to a few dads that wanted to establish a Youth side for their sons. One team subsequently grew into two teams and the club then begins to mushroom and we have say 20 or 30 teams or perhaps more.

Money can be raised with enthusiastic mothers an fathers. Sponsors arrive from all sorts of directions. Grants are available from local councils and other funding bodies.

The club becomes recognised as a community service. The downside arrives when players are 16 or 18 and the more talented ones migrate to Junior/Senior clubs. A few may remain with the club and progress into Men’s amateur football.

It is natural for those administering the club to consider at some stage creating a pathway to Senior football. This can be achieved with a partnership with a Senior club or by taking the difficult route of applying to the EOSFL or WOSFL and upgrading facilities as appropriate.

In most cases the level of support for a newly created Senior side is likely to be very poor at the outset. Interested family members and a few youngsters who play for youth sides is probably the most that can be expected to attend games.

However, providing that players are not paid it does not really matter. It may be possible to bring in older more experienced amateur players to swell the ranks but there is always the possibility of a clash of cultures.

A Youth club following the Senior route can over time have built up a lot of assets from grants and membership/monthly fees (say 700 players paying say £25 annual membership and £20 monthly training/match fees). Some money may be left over for important development projects! Then add the fund raising and sponsorship elements. Whilst some youth set-ups will struggle others will not.

The point I am making is that the funding model (assuming it works successfully) is very different for a Youth club that moves to Senior football. It will not work if the club is simply going to rely on its local support base in terms of matchday attendances.

A successful Youth club who establishes a Senior side in my view represents a positive element for the future of the EOSFL and WOSFL . However, it does need to be carefully assessed by the respective league officials to make sure that league criteria can be properly met and the applicants proposals are truly sustainable.

Totally - I can see some traditionally youth-only setups joining to provide a player pathway into adult football. I know a lot of people are still a bit sniffy about them: the  "weans team/nae support..." kind of thing, (and I'll be honest, initially I felt much the same way until I saw how successful their model has been). I remember someone making the suggestion on here that Rossvale didn't deserve a place in the top division and it should gone to a team who was "historically a big name" completely ignoring the fact that Rossvale had ragdolled a lot of historically big names on their road to the top table.

There's a reason there's no Queen's Park or Renton in the Scottish premier and no Royal Engineers or Clapham Rovers in the EPL...they were supplanted by newer teams with different but more successful ways of working...and that's what happened over the last decade or so with the likes of Rossvale and Gartcairn.

Sure, their supports are negligible, but too many people crowdwank over the numbers only a relative handful of sides pull in and ignore the inconvenient truth that a lot of "traditional" teams' crowds aren't huge...how many teams in the WOS or in the juniors before it pull in three figures for a bog standard game...20 or maybe 30 at a push? How many take three figures to every away game...is it even a dozen?

 

[Bestsinceslicebread]

On 14/03/2021 at 19:39, Hillonearth said:

Totally - I can see some traditionally youth-only setups joining to provide a player pathway into adult football. I know a lot of people are still a bit sniffy about them: the  "weans team/nae support..." kind of thing, (and I'll be honest, initially I felt much the same way until I saw how successful their model has been). I remember someone making the suggestion on here that Rossvale didn't deserve a place in the top division and it should gone to a team who was "historically a big name" completely ignoring the fact that Rossvale had ragdolled a lot of historically big names on their road to the top table.

There's a reason there's no Queen's Park or Renton in the Scottish premier and no Royal Engineers or Clapham Rovers in the EPL...they were supplanted by newer teams with different but more successful ways of working...and that's what happened over the last decade or so with the likes of Rossvale and Gartcairn.

Sure, their supports are negligible, but too many people crowdwank over the numbers only a relative handful of sides pull in and ignore the inconvenient truth that a lot of "traditional" teams' crowds aren't huge...how many teams in the WOS or in the juniors before it pull in three figures for a bog standard game...20 or maybe 30 at a push? How many take three figures to every away game...is it even a dozen?

 

I think one of the interesting ones in Glasgow is 'Giffnock North'. Total youth setup but don't have any senior or don't think they ever had a junior team.  They found their players leave and youth teams leave as a unit to join senior teams due to no official pathway, Think a full team upped sticks and joined Beith as their development team and players hear and there went to other development teams, although I only know of a couple of players who did so.

Genuinely not heard any moves about Giffnock North doing the same as StCadocs but you never know and Hillwood are the same although there's been relationships with local junior teams in the past

Edited March 17, 2021 by Bestsinceslicebread

[craigkillie]

Option Z was splitting at Tier 5 creating 3x feeders to the SPFL.
Which is a bit different to adding LL2 feeder leagues at Tier 6. I think that might be more of a problem with the SFA. We've seen how they're limiting the JPP. So adding another 16/32 clubs to that won't be encouraged by them

Aren't the current Tier 6 leagues part of the JPP? If so, then they wouldn't be adding clubs at all - in fact by pushing the EoS, WoS and SoS to Tier 7 and outside of the JPP, they'd actually be decreasing the number of teams covered by Tier 6.

[Antony]

16 hours ago, LongTimeLurker said:

Think a Lowland League 2 but with east and west sections would be ideal to get rid of pro/rel bottlenecks. It won't be long until enough west clubs would be licensed for that to be realistic and it would help to get all the clubs that operate with six figure budgets at the professional game board level where they belong. A way needs to be found to move the SoS down the pecking order a bit to a level where its clubs are keen to move up when the opportunity arises and an LL2 west might be a better fit on that than the LL.

I understand the South of Scotland League is a historic league but it has only been given the status of tier 6 in the last 4 or 5 years when there was a huge hole in the pyramid which is now filled by the WoS. It has always been viewed as a level below the EoS anyway, with clubs using it as a stepping stone. 

Would there be a big issue with just moving it down a tier without affecting anything else? A league which has always covered such a small area shouldn't be feeding into tier 5 anyway, it doesn't make sense. In practice you are only changing where a promoted team goes which is rare anyway.

There is also an argument that it holds team back from progressing. There may be ambitious clubs in the SoS that want to compete at a higher level but the Lowland League is much too big a step up. How can you go from playing Nithsdale Wanderers and Edusport reserves all season to beating a Talbot or a Clydebank in a playoff. There should be an intermediate level for clubs that feel they have outgrown the SoS but are not good enough for the Lowland League. 

[FairWeatherFan]

4 hours ago, craigkillie said:

 

 

 

Aren't the current Tier 6 leagues part of the JPP? If so, then they wouldn't be adding clubs at all - in fact by pushing the EoS, WoS and SoS to Tier 7 and outside of the JPP, they'd actually be decreasing the number of teams covered by Tier 6.

 

 

Why would the likes of the EoSFL and SoSFL that have been under the SFA for decades sign off on that? 

[craigkillie]

2 hours ago, FairWeatherFan said:

Why would the likes of the EoSFL and SoSFL that have been under the SFA for decades sign off on that? 

They wouldn't stop being "under the SFA", they'd just stop being directly governed by the SFA's disciplinary system. It doesn't seem like something a league should bother getting worked up about - would be very similar to the Juniors grimly holding on to a pointless tradition.

[FairWeatherFan]

8 minutes ago, craigkillie said:

They wouldn't stop being "under the SFA", they'd just stop being directly governed by the SFA's disciplinary system. It doesn't seem like something a league should bother getting worked up about - would be very similar to the Juniors grimly holding on to a pointless tradition.

It was a sticking point during the PWG discussions. With the likes of the EoSFL trying to get things all under the SFA. I'm not sure why they would suddenly give up on that point. You're asking what is essentially a volunteer league body to take on an additional workload when there's literally no benefit to them. The EoS Premier basically is the LL2 East and no one is proposing a LL2.

[craigkillie]

2 hours ago, FairWeatherFan said:

It was a sticking point during the PWG discussions. With the likes of the EoSFL trying to get things all under the SFA. I'm not sure why they would suddenly give up on that point. You're asking what is essentially a volunteer league body to take on an additional workload when there's literally no benefit to them. The EoS Premier basically is the LL2 East and no one is proposing a LL2.

Aren't the WoS already having to do the discipline for the Tier 7 leagues and below? Now that these leagues are on a par, the same should be true for the EoS going forward. If amateur and youth leagues can competently run a disciplinary process then there is no reason why the EoS can't do it.

This sounds like a pretext for not wanting to be pushed down the pecking order, rather than a genuine reason. You can't stand in the way of progress on the basis of "oh, it makes our life a wee bit harder".

[Burnieman]

My understanding is that any idea of a LL2 has largely been shelved.  It was in reaction to the possibility of the WRJFA / ERJFA entering the Pyramid, where a LL2 West / East would push them further down the pecking order, and give the LL control of tier 6.

That threat no longer exists.

[Bad Wolf]

8 hours ago, Antony said:

I understand the South of Scotland League is a historic league but it has only been given the status of tier 6 in the last 4 or 5 years when there was a huge hole in the pyramid which is now filled by the WoS. It has always been viewed as a level below the EoS anyway, with clubs using it as a stepping stone. 

Would there be a big issue with just moving it down a tier without affecting anything else? A league which has always covered such a small area shouldn't be feeding into tier 5 anyway, it doesn't make sense. In practice you are only changing where a promoted team goes which is rare anyway.

There is also an argument that it holds team back from progressing. There may be ambitious clubs in the SoS that want to compete at a higher level but the Lowland League is much too big a step up. How can you go from playing Nithsdale Wanderers and Edusport reserves all season to beating a Talbot or a Clydebank in a playoff. There should be an intermediate level for clubs that feel they have outgrown the SoS but are not good enough for the Lowland League. 

The SOS doesn't cover a small area, it covers a bloody huge one. Yes, indeed, the standard may not be high, as the small population naturally means a small player pool. I remain to be convinced that it deserves to be moved down a level because people whose idea of a "big" game is playing their neighbours from three miles down the road think it should be. I don't mean you personally, btw, I mean this site's "SOS bad"-bots in general.

Edited March 15, 2021 by Bad Wolf

[Antony]

1 hour ago, Bad Wolf said:

The SOS doesn't cover a small area, it covers a bloody huge one. Yes, indeed, the standard may not be high, as the small population naturally means a small player pool. I remain to be convinced that it deserves to be moved down a level because people whose idea of a "big" game is playing their neighbours from three miles down the road think it should be. I don't mean you personally, btw, I mean this site's "SOS bad"-bots in general.

Yeah you are probably right. I just think tier 6 will eventually be split 3 ways: East, West and North. I don't know if a Dumfries and Galloway league at the same level makes sense in a working pyramid. I also think it could be better for the SOS  because it gives ambitious teams a chance to progress if there isn't such a huge step up in quality. 

[San Starko Rover]

The SOS doesn't cover a small area, it covers a bloody huge one. Yes, indeed, the standard may not be high, as the small population naturally means a small player pool. I remain to be convinced that it deserves to be moved down a level because people whose idea of a "big" game is playing their neighbours from three miles down the road think it should be. I don't mean you personally, btw, I mean this site's "SOS bad"-bots in general.

Don’t thank anyone is saying SOS Bad! And I’m not sure it’s a big issue for bots to discuss, but do we need 3 leagues covering the Southern half of a country the size of Scotland. Tier 5 splits the country in half so with promotion to Tier 4 comes double the area to travel. D&G is a large area but it’s not half the Lowland area. A team coming out of the SOS is going from traveling D&G to half of Scotland which is a bigger step up in traveling area than a team from the EOS or WOS league. You said the standard isn’t high because of their player pool so again stepping up to tier 5 will be a bigger step for a SOS team than the other leagues. Overall I guess many just think it’s neater to split into East and West with two leagues covering similar sized areas with a straight playoff than having a 3 way playoff with 3 areas of varying sizes and strengths. I’d be surprised if the SOS and WOS don’t merge in the future but that’s up to them.

[Gordon EF]

3 hours ago, Bad Wolf said:

The SOS doesn't cover a small area, it covers a bloody huge one. Yes, indeed, the standard may not be high, as the small population naturally means a small player pool. I remain to be convinced that it deserves to be moved down a level because people whose idea of a "big" game is playing their neighbours from three miles down the road think it should be. I don't mean you personally, btw, I mean this site's "SOS bad"-bots in general.

It's more to do with the fact that senior Scottish football has largely been moving away from the Balkanised mess it always has been towards a unified structure that makes sense, is fair and offers clubs the chance to find the level they should be playing at. The SoSFL existing at tier 6 is a bit of a historical/geographical anachronism that nobody would suggest if we were starting with a blank page.