Conference League Good Guys List

[FairWeatherFan]

34 minutes ago, Che Dail said:

No idea, info is here: 

https://www.uefa.com/nationalassociations/uefarankings/club/#/yr/2023

 

 

59 minutes ago, Che Dail said:

Removing the top two teams from every other country would place Aberdeen 88th in Europe, with clubs from 23 countries above them.

This includes:  6 from Belgium, Netherlands = 5, Austria=4, Turkey= 4, Cyprus= 3, and 1 each from Switzerland, Israel, Norway, Denmark, Slovakia, Croatia, Slovakia and Romania. 

Netherlands 5 above after Top 2 removed.

Starting point has 8. Rankings based on whichever's highest between the club's points and national contribution.

		Total Pts	National
12	Ajax	89	11.98
34	Feyenoord	51	11.98
37	AZ	47.5	11.98
41	PSV	43	11.98
123	Twente	2.5	11.98
124	Vitesse	11	11.98
125	Willem II	2	11.98
126	Utrecht	1.5	11.98
173	Aberdeen	8	7.28

Can't really count the national contribution since it's the default. Enter at a qualifier, lose two games and you still get it. That leaves 5 clubs higher than Aberdeen on total points, but I thought the Top 2 of every country was being removed?

		Total Pts	National
12	Ajax	89	11.98
34	Feyenoord	51	11.98
37	AZ	47.5	11.98
41	PSV	43	11.98
124	Vitesse	11	11.98
173	Aberdeen	8	7.28
123	Twente	2.5	11.98
125	Willem II	2	11.98
126	Utrecht	1.5	11.98

 

[Che Dail]

15 minutes ago, morrison said:

That's good to hear. Clearly, a club paying to put a second team into the middle of the established pyramid, relegating 200+ clubs in the process, isn't equitable. I look forward to a sensible proposal being put forward after appropriate consultation with all clubs in due course.

 

I know, I don't disagree.

However, I think there's little merit starting at Tier 8 - not for the elite clubs, or those in the lower leagues.  

But they shouldn't be jumping ahead of existing Licensed clubs in the Lowland League, and probably not those competing at the top level EoSFL / WoSFL - there should be a place to get them in together.

 

Edited May 11, 2023 by Che Dail

[Che Dail]

29 minutes ago, Burnieman said:

Nobody in the Pyramid wants B teams though, and at the risk of repeating myself and others, there is absolutely no evidence that B teams in the Pyramid would work where the return of a strong reserve league (combined with loans) wouldn't.

The latter has a proven track record in Scotland of producing players - just look at the comments from former internationalists and their experiences of playing in that environment - that was until the new era of clipboard coaches got involved.

'Nobody wants B Teams' is not a correct statement.

We learned that once the 'No to B Teams' campaign stepped out of its P+B echo-chamber onto twitter... where people are allowed to express a different opinion.

[Burnieman]

21 minutes ago, Che Dail said:

Bit of a diatribe, but I'll respond to one particular bit I'm interested in, which is to borrow a league structure from another country and see what it looks like for Scotland.

Since you've mentioned Norway, I've run with that.  Norway's performance at Beijing Olympics burnished its reputation as having the best sports system in the world, both in elite performance and making a meaningful contribution to communities and its democracy (aspen Institute).  Football should be seen in that wider context.

Nonetheless, Molde and Bodo/Glimt appear at 42 and 46th in Europe, behind Celtic at 32.  Molde's average attendance is about 5500, Bodo/Glimt is 6000.  These are small clubs by comparison and punching well above their weight in Europe.  

Molde: 31 player squad includes 1 Dane and 1 Swede.  The rest are Norwegian.

Bodo/ Glimt : 31 squad, 25 are Norwegian.

Rosenburg: 26 squad, 18 Norwegian

It's an exporter of talent - its elite players are abroad, similar to Scotland.

There are 27 B teams in its league structure.  This is not universally popular, and is regularly questioned by clubs (and fans) that don't have one.  But the FA and participating clubs conclude, consistently, that there are more positives than negatives with the way it is organized now.

If Scotland was to adopt the Norwegian league structure (which, incidentally, is the same format as Spain, Czech Rep and Austria) it would promote just about every club,  allow free-movement between leagues, and a necessary departure from woeful 10-team leagues. 

There's a place for B-teams starting at the bottom of the 'semi-professional' game (licensed clubs).  Feeder leagues below would be streamlined regionally further down - avoiding scenarios like Hawick v St Andrews at tier 7, for example.

Importantly, it would provide a far more satisfactory outcome for Dundee and P&K clubs via the Midland League - and competitive local football for amateur / semi-pro players at grassroots level.

Apologies if I've omitted a club, or duplicated one:

There's only 3 clubs, 4/5 at a stretch, who want to field B teams, not 12.

[Burnieman]

32 minutes ago, Che Dail said:

'Nobody wants B Teams' is not a correct statement.

We learned that once the 'No to B Teams' campaign stepped out of its P+B echo-chamber onto twitter... where people are allowed to express a different opinion.

OK very few people actively want B teams (I remove the fans from their 3 teams involved as a significant percentage will want it because it's their team).

Also from what I have seen on twitter very few people actively want B teams. (I remove the fans from their 3 teams involved as a significant percentage will want it because it's their team).

[welshbairn]

I'd suggest Norway's sporting success is far more likely to do with much greater state investment in coaching and facilities at school level than having B-teams in their football league structure.

[kingbob1875]

3 hours ago, Che Dail said:

Removing the top two teams from every other country would place Aberdeen 88th in Europe, with clubs from 23 countries above them.

This includes:  6 from Belgium, Netherlands = 5, Austria=4, Turkey= 4, Cyprus= 3, and 1 each from Switzerland, Israel, Norway, Denmark, Slovakia, Croatia, Slovakia and Romania.  

The article (in case you didn't get to the end) concludes: 

Any way you want to dress it up, Scottish teams’ under-performing in European competition when removing Rangers and Celtic from the equation doesn’t merely not add up; it is nothing short of criminal.

Having previously stated:

In coming up short with the best showings from the League Of Ireland, this ‘ah, but’ attitude falls apart when considering the scale of Scotland’s cinch Premiership compared to the Irish Premier Division. Sligo’s player budget is around a third of Motherwell’s outlay. In Irish terms, it is pretty average, which means that the squad wage bills of such as Aberdeen and Hibs were up to six times Dundalk’s when they made their group stage breakthrough two years ago.

 

On this performance, it is far-fetched to believe that Scottish clubs would progress to the Champions League in the absence of Celtic and Rangers from the league structure any time soon.  In fact, we already have data from the period in which Rangers were absent from the top league.

Change is overdue - I don't like the Conference League proposal as it stands and I believe there's a better way forward following precedent from abroad.

Note that of those 23 countries with clubs performing better than ours, 18 allow B teams in their pyramid - close to 80%.

 

 

This is such bad methodology part of the reason teams have a low score is that they don't qualify for Europe every year, as Rangers and Celtic earned two spots each year, there are fewer available. Just subtracting two without acknowledging the opportunity that would have been given to someone else doesn't constitute a fair argument.

It's like saying the League Cup is a farce because if you take out Rangers and Celtic matches, there wasn't even a final this year.

Not that I think the current system is functioning as well as it could be, but accepting change for changes sake doesn't work either.

[craigkillie]

1 hour ago, welshbairn said:

I'd suggest Norway's sporting success is far more likely to do with much greater state investment in coaching and facilities at school level than having B-teams in their football league structure.

They also haven't qualified for a men's football tournament since 2000.

Edited May 11, 2023 by craigkillie

[Guest]

The major problem in Scotland as I see it. We have 2 clubs that are financial behemoths when compared to every other team in the country.

So naturally following on from that; their b teams would be far above the level of other teams.

If promotion was open to all would we end up with a top league full of CeltGers down to the letter F.

Have no idea in countries with b teams how financially wealthy clubs are. But in dear old Scotia there is a massive imbalance. A major reason why b teams wont work for me.

[CityDave94]

4 hours ago, Che Dail said:

'Nobody wants B Teams' is not a correct statement.

We learned that once the 'No to B Teams' campaign stepped out of its P+B echo-chamber onto twitter... where people are allowed to express a different opinion.

Twitter is the largest echo-chamber in existence, an absolute bin fire.

 

[Dink]

I'm struggling to find the numbers but I'm fairly sure that we have far fewer UEFA qualified youth coaches per head of population than other countries. I also seem to recall (but again I can find figures) that we have far fewer indoor facilities / 3G surfaces than other countries with a similar climate. I reckon that if we improve those two things then we'll see Scotland produce better young footballers. Unfortunately it's a far more expensive endeavour than sandwiching B teams into what is a well attended, if not brilliantly functioning, pyramid.

Oh, and obviously, get B teams to f**k.

[forfarton]

6 hours ago, Che Dail said:

Bit of a diatribe, but I'll respond to one particular bit I'm interested in, which is to borrow a league structure from another country and see what it looks like for Scotland.

Since you've mentioned Norway, I've run with that.  Norway's performance at Beijing Olympics burnished its reputation as having the best sports system in the world, both in elite performance and making a meaningful contribution to communities and its democracy (aspen Institute).  Football should be seen in that wider context.

Nonetheless, Molde and Bodo/Glimt appear at 42 and 46th in Europe, behind Celtic at 32.  Molde's average attendance is about 5500, Bodo/Glimt is 6000.  These are small clubs by comparison and punching well above their weight in Europe.  

Molde: 31 player squad includes 1 Dane and 1 Swede.  The rest are Norwegian.

Bodo/ Glimt : 31 squad, 25 are Norwegian.

Rosenburg: 26 squad, 18 Norwegian

It's an exporter of talent - its elite players are abroad, similar to Scotland.

There are 27 B teams in its league structure.  This is not universally popular, and is regularly questioned by clubs (and fans) that don't have one.  But the FA and participating clubs conclude, consistently, that there are more positives than negatives with the way it is organized now.

If Scotland was to adopt the Norwegian league structure (which, incidentally, is the same format as Spain, Czech Rep and Austria) it would promote just about every club,  allow free-movement between leagues, and a necessary departure from woeful 10-team leagues. 

There's a place for B-teams starting at the bottom of the 'semi-professional' game (licensed clubs).  Feeder leagues below would be streamlined regionally further down - avoiding scenarios like Hawick v St Andrews at tier 7, for example.

Importantly, it would provide a far more satisfactory outcome for Dundee and P&K clubs via the Midland League - and competitive local football for amateur / semi-pro players at grassroots level.

Apologies if I've omitted a club, or duplicated one:

The pyramid structure you propose is a reasonable starting point, but it should not exclude currently unlicensed clubs at T4. It would also need to have further tiers below to ensure all 200+ clubs in the current pyramid are accommodated. The B teams shouls not be included. They can keep to a reserve league with players put on loan to clubs at a suitable level for their ability and stage of development. 

[Marten]

7 hours ago, Che Dail said:

Bit of a diatribe, but I'll respond to one particular bit I'm interested in, which is to borrow a league structure from another country and see what it looks like for Scotland.

Since you've mentioned Norway, I've run with that.  Norway's performance at Beijing Olympics burnished its reputation as having the best sports system in the world, both in elite performance and making a meaningful contribution to communities and its democracy (aspen Institute).  Football should be seen in that wider context.

Nonetheless, Molde and Bodo/Glimt appear at 42 and 46th in Europe, behind Celtic at 32.  Molde's average attendance is about 5500, Bodo/Glimt is 6000.  These are small clubs by comparison and punching well above their weight in Europe.  

Molde: 31 player squad includes 1 Dane and 1 Swede.  The rest are Norwegian.

Bodo/ Glimt : 31 squad, 25 are Norwegian.

Rosenburg: 26 squad, 18 Norwegian

It's an exporter of talent - its elite players are abroad, similar to Scotland.

There are 27 B teams in its league structure.  This is not universally popular, and is regularly questioned by clubs (and fans) that don't have one.  But the FA and participating clubs conclude, consistently, that there are more positives than negatives with the way it is organized now.

If Scotland was to adopt the Norwegian league structure (which, incidentally, is the same format as Spain, Czech Rep and Austria) it would promote just about every club,  allow free-movement between leagues, and a necessary departure from woeful 10-team leagues. 

There's a place for B-teams starting at the bottom of the 'semi-professional' game (licensed clubs).  Feeder leagues below would be streamlined regionally further down - avoiding scenarios like Hawick v St Andrews at tier 7, for example.

Importantly, it would provide a far more satisfactory outcome for Dundee and P&K clubs via the Midland League - and competitive local football for amateur / semi-pro players at grassroots level.

Apologies if I've omitted a club, or duplicated one:

Okay, let's compare Norway and Scotland.

Population: 5.5m for both (so in that sense really comparable)

UEFA coefficient: Scotland 36.400 - 9th, Norway 29.000 - 16th

FIFA ranking: Scotland 1,501 - 36th, Norway 1,464 - 44th

Last major tournament qualified for: Scotland - Euro 2020, Norway - Euro 2000

 

So not exactly a reason to copy their system. The league that Lochee United would end up in with your proposal is considerably worse than where we are now, so no thank you.

[Guest]

We need to start a new political party.

'B teams can get in the sea'.

There is another name but can't see that being allowed on voting papers.

 

[Marten]

Just now, HorseyGhirl said:

We need to start a new political party.

'B teams can get in the sea'.

There is another name but can't see that being allowed on voting papers.

 

I'll join you!  

[RedEd]

44 minutes ago, HorseyGhirl said:

We need to start a new political party.

'B teams can get in the sea'.

There is another name but can't see that being allowed on voting papers.

 

You're right. You can only have six words on the ballot paper for the name of the party 

[Gordon EF]

9 hours ago, Che Dail said:

Bit of a diatribe, but I'll respond to one particular bit I'm interested in, which is to borrow a league structure from another country and see what it looks like for Scotland.

Since you've mentioned Norway, I've run with that.  Norway's performance at Beijing Olympics burnished its reputation as having the best sports system in the world, both in elite performance and making a meaningful contribution to communities and its democracy (aspen Institute).  Football should be seen in that wider context.

Nonetheless, Molde and Bodo/Glimt appear at 42 and 46th in Europe, behind Celtic at 32.  Molde's average attendance is about 5500, Bodo/Glimt is 6000.  These are small clubs by comparison and punching well above their weight in Europe.  

Molde: 31 player squad includes 1 Dane and 1 Swede.  The rest are Norwegian.

Bodo/ Glimt : 31 squad, 25 are Norwegian.

Rosenburg: 26 squad, 18 Norwegian

It's an exporter of talent - its elite players are abroad, similar to Scotland.

There are 27 B teams in its league structure.  This is not universally popular, and is regularly questioned by clubs (and fans) that don't have one.  But the FA and participating clubs conclude, consistently, that there are more positives than negatives with the way it is organized now.

If Scotland was to adopt the Norwegian league structure (which, incidentally, is the same format as Spain, Czech Rep and Austria) it would promote just about every club,  allow free-movement between leagues, and a necessary departure from woeful 10-team leagues. 

There's a place for B-teams starting at the bottom of the 'semi-professional' game (licensed clubs).  Feeder leagues below would be streamlined regionally further down - avoiding scenarios like Hawick v St Andrews at tier 7, for example.

Importantly, it would provide a far more satisfactory outcome for Dundee and P&K clubs via the Midland League - and competitive local football for amateur / semi-pro players at grassroots level.

Apologies if I've omitted a club, or duplicated one:

So are you now pivoting from bringing in regionalisation higher up the structure to arguing for B teams and greater ease of movement between the leagues?

Because nothing you've mentioned as a benefit here has anything to do with how many teams play in "national" leagues or how many tiers are "national".

A coherent consistent structure that allows clubs to move up and down easily isn't something I'd take issue with at all. There are major issues on that front in the Scottish system. Issues the English system, for example, doesn't really have.

B teams has been done to death elsewhere.

Still though, I'm not sure you've connected the dots between Bodo/Glimpt being quite good in Europe with fewer national tiers in the Norweigian structure than the Scottish one.

How are Aberdeen being more likely to win European ties by East Fife being in a league with Brora, as opposed to Stranraer?

[evh78]

2 hours ago, Marten said:

Okay, let's compare Norway and Scotland.

Population: 5.5m for both (so in that sense really comparable)

UEFA coefficient: Scotland 36.400 - 9th, Norway 29.000 - 16th

FIFA ranking: Scotland 1,501 - 36th, Norway 1,464 - 44th

Last major tournament qualified for: Scotland - Euro 2020, Norway - Euro 2000

 

So not exactly a reason to copy their system. The league that Lochee United would end up in with your proposal is considerably worse than where we are now, so no thank you.

Nae Queen Of The South like?

[Brazilianlex]

10 hours ago, welshbairn said:

I'd suggest Norway's sporting success is far more likely to do with much greater state investment in coaching and facilities at school level than having B-teams in their football league structure.

Norways Government and sporting bodies work together to encourage participation in football at grass roots level by funding Astroturf pitches which are then provided free to use to kids unlike in Scotland where it can cost over £100 per hour to hire.

[VincentGuerin]

All this wading through pish about coefficients etc masks what the real issue for me is.

A B-Team is fucking insulting opposition to give to a proper fitba team representing a club and a community. It reduces the opponent club from the dignity of being a fitba team to just being something to play against another club's kids. It's insulting to the clubs, it's insulting to the paying fans, for whom their teams matches matter as much as those up the pyramid. It's fucking awful

And, make no mistake. If this abomination of an idea gets the go ahead, you'll have B-Teams coming to a League One/Championship near you soon enough.

It's such a terrible idea. The people running Scottish fitba need battered about the head. They are fucking clueless about what the game actually is and who it is for.