Jump to content

More Shenanigans From Our Imperial Masters @SPFL


Recommended Posts

3 minutes ago, The Moonster said:

Size of leagues isn't really the issue with gaps between teams, it's financial distribution. No point moving to a 16 or 18 team league if all the positions get the same money. 

If there's an 18 team league then there's a greater equality of gate receipts within that league and no creaming off three/four Old Firm home games per season if you're Kilmarnock (for example) to pad out your budget. 

The distribution would necessarily change within each league though you're right to point to the importance of a viable breakdown between the levels. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, RandomGuy. said:

Bigger leagues would be shite, boring, and likely meaningless for a swathe of clubs by about February.

There's a reason we moved away from them.

How do so many other countries manage it?

If you look at the top 20 leagues in Europe it’s only a minority that have a top league as small as ours. Every game doesn’t need to be a matter of life or death.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

26 minutes ago, eez-eh said:

How do so many other countries manage it?

If you look at the top 20 leagues in Europe it’s only a minority that have a top league as small as ours. Every game doesn’t need to be a matter of life or death.

It obviously could work, I think it’s just a matter of whether it would be preferable. If you look at our leagues just now, almost everyone still has something to play for, whether that’s European football, a playoff spot or avoiding relegation. If you compare with the EPL, as an example, there’s a fair few teams who’s seasons are essentially over and will just be going through the motions for another month or so Wolves and Palace for example. There’s be quite a few more who’s seasons were definitely over if they got as few European spots as we do as well.

FWIW, I’d like the 12 team format of our top flight replicated throughout the lower leagues, with a split. Change it to 2 up 2 down in every division, with 3rd top and 3rd bottom in a playoff as well.  I’m aware that my idea probably has just as many holes and shite bits to it as any other does though.

Edited by oneteaminglasgow
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I quite like the split - even this season, makes games feel more meaningful. 12 per league would feel fine, but better to split after played each team twice and then play twice again post split - makes the home / away split simple. Would drop teams to 32 games though so would lose 2 home games each - but if you lost the games from some of the midweek slots first then it probably wouldn’t have too big an impact on clubs bottom line.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

16-team top league, four-way split after two rounds, 36 games in total, broadcasters (probably) still get their four old-firm games a season.

16-team championship with a fair play-off that brings the team finishing 15th in the top league  in from the start (same model as current Championship/L1 play-off). Totally agnostic about how the split would work.

Then either a 16-team third tier... or go regional, depending on what the clubs involved decide they want.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

16-team top league, four-way split after two rounds, 36 games in total, broadcasters (probably) still get their four old-firm games a season.
16-team championship with a fair play-off that brings the team finishing 15th in the top league  in from the start (same model as current Championship/L1 play-off). Totally agnostic about how the split would work.
Then either a 16-team third tier... or go regional, depending on what the clubs involved decide they want.

I like the idea of 16 team top league and the split sounds exciting for the top 4 and the bottom 4 but really what do the teams in 5-8 and 9-12 get from playing the extra six games other than cash? Really there would need to be some incentive to make it worthwhile.
Only thing I could think of for the teams on 5-8 is that the team finishing 5th gets a playoff with the team finishing 4th for the fourth European slot(if four places available).
Can’t think of anything for the teams in 9-12 though..
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't get this 'meaningless games' thing. No game involving my team is meaningless.

Each season teams should play every other team home and away. The one who has the most points is the winner. Simple. It's such a shame that there seems to be a need to manufacture excitement by introducing distortions to the even handed model of old. I guess it's a sign of the way we live our lives at the moment. Short term thinking, instant gratification. It doesn't make the quality of football any better. It simply increases the momentary excitement. Our game, at club and national levels, is not improved by these constructs.

If you want to find a way to give every team something to play for until the last minute of the season, why not use league positions as seeding for a meaningful national cup competition the following season. Give the name 'League Cup' some real meaning.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, roman_bairn said:


I like the idea of 16 team top league and the split sounds exciting for the top 4 and the bottom 4 but really what do the teams in 5-8 and 9-12 get from playing the extra six games other than cash? Really there would need to be some incentive to make it worthwhile.
Only thing I could think of for the teams on 5-8 is that the team finishing 5th gets a playoff with the team finishing 4th for the fourth European slot(if four places available).
Can’t think of anything for the teams in 9-12 though..

As of this season we have 5 places in Europe up for grabs, so currently the 5th-8th sides could play for the last European spot, but that wouldn’t always be possible if Scotland’s coefficient drops in the future.

The 9th-12th section would be the problem spot as we’ve got this obsession in Scotland that every game must have some kind of importance with regards to relegation, promotion, playoffs or Europe. And the only thing I can think of with this part of the split would be to give the team in 9th a playoff against the team in 5th for the last European position - which wouldn’t be particularly fair.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't get this 'meaningless games' thing. No game involving my team is meaningless.
Each season teams should play every other team home and away. The one who has the most points is the winner. Simple. It's such a shame that there seems to be a need to manufacture excitement by introducing distortions to the even handed model of old. I guess it's a sign of the way we live our lives at the moment. Short term thinking, instant gratification. It doesn't make the quality of football any better. It simply increases the momentary excitement. Our game, at club and national levels, is not improved by these constructs.
If you want to find a way to give every team something to play for until the last minute of the season, why not use league positions as seeding for a meaningful national cup competition the following season. Give the name 'League Cup' some real meaning.

I kinda get your point and every game my team plays is important to me too. However you cant tell me that some games are not more important than others? Otherwise you might as well have every team playing friendlies all season.
Sport is about competition and to have that you need to have something meaningful to strive for.
You won’t get that between teams in 9-12 place and most players won’t be trying a fig to avoid injury, with minds on the beach holiday (remember those days?) rather than beating the opposition....

Ps. With you on the League Cup seeding thing though.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

As of this season we have 5 places in Europe up for grabs, so currently the 5th-8th sides could play for the last European spot, but that wouldn’t always be possible if Scotland’s coefficient drops in the future.
The 9th-12th section would be the problem spot as we’ve got this obsession in Scotland that every game must have some kind of importance with regards to relegation, promotion, playoffs or Europe. And the only thing I can think of with this part of the split would be to give the team in 9th a playoff against the team in 5th for the last European position - which wouldn’t be particularly fair.

Yeah, can you imagine the thoughts of those finishing 6 to 8? [emoji848]
Link to comment
Share on other sites

59 minutes ago, roman_bairn said:


I kinda get your point and every game my team plays is important to me too. However you cant tell me that some games are not more important than others? Otherwise you might as well have every team playing friendlies all season.
Sport is about competition and to have that you need to have something meaningful to strive for.
You won’t get that between teams in 9-12 place and most players won’t be trying a fig to avoid injury, with minds on the beach holiday (remember those days?) rather than beating the opposition....

I agree that some games are more important than others. Making every game 'meaningful' is, it seems to me, an attempt  to imbue each with the same degree of importance. So I'm not sure what point you're making.

Sport is about competition. Winners and losers. Those who win more than they lose rise to the top and those that don't drop to the bottom. That is the nature of competition. Ultimately, there is only one way to make a competition meaningful for all until the end. It's called a lottery.

Setting aside those that earn tens of thousands of pounds a week (as I'm unsure of their motivation), most footballers play for the love of the game. Given that they only get to do that around 30 times a year, I don't buy into the argument that they don't try to win every game. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I agree that some games are more important than others. Making every game 'meaningful' is, it seems to me, an attempt  to imbue each with the same degree of importance. So I'm not sure what point you're making.
Sport is about competition. Winners and losers. Those who win more than they lose rise to the top and those that don't drop to the bottom. That is the nature of competition. Ultimately, there is only one way to make a competition meaningful for all until the end. It's called a lottery.
Setting aside those that earn tens of thousands of pounds a week (as I'm unsure of their motivation), most footballers play for the love of the game. Given that they only get to do that around 30 times a year, I don't buy into the argument that they don't try to win every game. 

Maybe you should watch Falkirk at the moment? [emoji17]
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, roman_bairn said:


I like the idea of 16 team top league and the split sounds exciting for the top 4 and the bottom 4 but really what do the teams in 5-8 and 9-12 get from playing the extra six games other than cash? Really there would need to be some incentive to make it worthwhile.
Only thing I could think of for the teams on 5-8 is that the team finishing 5th gets a playoff with the team finishing 4th for the fourth European slot(if four places available).
Can’t think of anything for the teams in 9-12 though..

The main focus is on the Title and Relegation 'sections', but you could go radical in the middle: each section (5-8 and 9-12) plays home and away, retaining points; the top of each section play off for the fifth European spot.

That does involve a pretty major change in how people think about leagues: basically, 'you all finished mid-table, this is a bonus round' (as opposed to 'how come a team finishing in 12th gets a shot, however remote, at Europe?)'. And prize money would still be keyed to where you finished.

My view is it would be worth it, not only to 'sustain interest'... you'd actually be generating new interest.

The Euro play-off would be a one-off at a neutral ground. Relegation/promotion play-off would be modelled on the current Championship/L1 play-off, i.e. a 'fair' semi-final over two legs, then a one-off final at a neutral ground. Cup finals left, right, and centre.

What broadcasters want shouldn't determine everything, but it's a factor; this structure would give them marketable play-offs - and 'finals' - at various levels; and it would also (almost certainly) give them their four old-firm games, but maybe now two of them being 'show-down' games at the sharp end of the season.

Almost every initiative for restructuring founders on one self-interest conflicting with another; there's something here for everyone.

Link to comment
Share on other sites


I like the idea of 16 team top league and the split sounds exciting for the top 4 and the bottom 4 but really what do the teams in 5-8 and 9-12 get from playing the extra six games other than cash? Really there would need to be some incentive to make it worthwhile.
Only thing I could think of for the teams on 5-8 is that the team finishing 5th gets a playoff with the team finishing 4th for the fourth European slot(if four places available).
Can’t think of anything for the teams in 9-12 though..
Prize money I guess, how much does it go up per position?
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Teams placed 5th-12th after 30 games each could all just play one another the once more, in a middle section of 8. It's ugly-looking but would keep European opportunities open for them all.

Ten or so years at there was an investigation done by an accountancy firm, KPMG or some such, on the best format for Scotland's top division. They chose 16 teams, dividing into 4 fours.

 

Edit:

The SFL also once had unanimous agreement on a change of league structure to 16-10-16...

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.scotsman.com/regions/sfl-vote-new-three-tier-league-all-42-clubs-under-one-roof-2479308%3famp

 

...amazing to think!

Edited by theboke
Tripe added.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Teams placed 5th-12th after 30 games each could all just play one another the once more, in a middle section of 8. It's ugly-looking but would keep European opportunities open for them all.
Ten or so years at there was an investigation done by an accountancy firm, KPMG or some such, on the best format for Scotland's top division. They chose 16 teams, dividing into 4 fours.
 
Edit:
The SFL also once had unanimous agreement on a change of league structure to 16-10-16...
https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.scotsman.com/regions/sfl-vote-new-three-tier-league-all-42-clubs-under-one-roof-2479308%3famp
 
...amazing to think!

2012 and even then proposals included a debate on including old firm second elevens...
Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 hours ago, theboke said:

Teams placed 5th-12th after 30 games each could all just play one another the once more, in a middle section of 8. It's ugly-looking but would keep European opportunities open for them all.

Belgium have done something more complicated for their 16 but the basic premise would work for this where the middle gets seeded and split in two. 

Group A: 5th, 7th, 9th, 11th. Group B: 6th, 8th, 10th, 12th. 

Group A winner v Group B winner play-off for a Euro spot or go onto face lowest Championship group team in a Euro spot. 

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...