SPL ponders expansion plans ....

[Joe DiMaggio]

Regarding the problem of the OF only playing each other twice, with the 16 teams playing each other twice it comes to 30 games over the season.

Im sure there is a Fifa or Uefa rule that stipulates there has to be a certain amount of games in a league season so 30 would not be enough. However an 8 team split with 7 further games would allow for a 3rd game, though I think having a neutral venue would be a good idea to save on bias arguments. Old firm - Hampden etc (a similar sized ground, not far away from the clubs grounds)

Perhaps just have 18 teams and a 34 game season like Italy. This allows for a few spare weeks compared to the 38 game calendar. A winter break perhaps?

Sweden play 30 games in a 16 team league, I'm sure fans would be willing and able to shell out more per game if there are less games to pay for and Scotty's idea about a revamp of the cups could make them more interesting (qualifying leagues tables? More teams in the mix?). I''m sure it can be done.

I'm sure fans wouldn't be willing to pay more money for less games!! Not a chance of it actually. The prices here are way over the top as it is, we used to charge ?25 for main stand in the spl, there is no way fans would be willing to pay more and get less games!

[Joe DiMaggio]

I would love this to happen but it wont. The OF carry too much power in voting shares. Every club is supposed to have 1 vote on a board if 12 and a 75% vote is needed for anything to pass. Unfortuanately the OF carry 5 votes each so if the other 10 voted yes and the OF vote no then its split 50/50 and nothing will happen. Has happened since the dawn of the SPL and until their voting power is removed there will be no chance of changing anything.

You seem to post a lot of nonsense half of the time and just blatantly make things up the other half. Where did you get that lot of guff from? Was it just made up again?

The old firm do not get 5 votes each, every club get 1 vote and and it was changed a few years back from an 8-4 vote needed to pass something to a 11-1 vote.

[Harry Chibber]

Campaigned for this a couple of years ago... I'd love to see a 16 team SPL and I'm delighted to see that there is action being taken to promote the idea. Whether the idea will be passed is another thing

I wouldn't be suprised if sky tv & ESPN have said to the SPL that unless they change the product then they wont continue to show the games... if they get involved then it might be the push needed to change old traditional and greedy view points

[The Mantis]

Haven't had time to read all the posts BUT the problem is with the clubs who get 3 home fixtures a season against the ugly sisters, not the twins of evil themselves. The OF pretty much sell out every week anyway.

[Kingsmills]

Haven't had time to read all the posts BUT the problem is with the clubs who get 3 home fixtures a season against the ugly sisters, not the twins of evil themselves. The OF pretty much sell out every week anyway.

Although not this season. May be a sign of even tougher times ahead for the forces of evil.

[12th Man]

A 16 team league would be good, there are too many teams in div 1 with great potential and only 1 place available each year and the quality of the team to win promotion has to be so good that they usually overtake the other bottom SPL teams the following season.

It gives employment to out of work players, (no reserves) as squad nos are increased.

The number of games couldn't decrease at for loss of revenue so home and away once =30, league split and another 7 = 37.

1 relegation and a play off with 2,3 and 4 in div 1.

Freshens up the SPL.

A club could survive relegation and try to win promotion again with out putting itself severely in dept.

Who would be in favour

Falkirk, Killy,St Mirren,Hamilton,St Johnstone.

For fear of relegation. this must also be a niggling fear for Aberdeen and Motherwell too.

Against

all current clubs will loose revenue from 1 -2 OF games

So financially 5 clubs would be in favour, 2 clubs may go along with it, and 5 clubs would deem themselves to be safe and would have more of a gripe about losing OF/TV revenue.

Morally more may be in favour as to give other clubs a chance and to give a new lease of life to the SPL

[caleykid1994]

Good theory and i will add that to these teams who think they'll lose out on OF money;

if the product changes then the SPL should be negotiating for a bigger sponsorship deal aswell as bigger TV rights & Marketing. These smaller teams will now have, in theory, easier games to pick up more points and thus if more money pours into the SPL then there wil be more money paid out the further up the league you will finish so it ends up a better product from the outside and very few teams will actually lose money.

[starchief]

And while we're at it..two leagues of 16 to 18 will do comprised of the bigger clubs and community clubs (e.g. QoS, Stirling, Stranraer etc). The likes of Stenhousmuir, Albion Rovers etc aren't needed. They're just keeping the community clubs from progressing by taking players from the more remote areas to unambitious teams in the central belt. The game would improve as there would be a better concentration of players in a smaller number of clubs. The argument, I know, is that these supporters won't go elsewhere but that means we're only losing the odd 100 here and there.

[ictchris]

And while we're at it..two leagues of 16 to 18 will do comprised of the bigger clubs and community clubs (e.g. QoS, Stirling, Stranraer etc). The likes of Stenhousmuir, Albion Rovers etc aren't needed. They're just keeping the community clubs from progressing by taking players from the more remote areas to unambitious teams in the central belt. The game would improve as there would be a better concentration of players in a smaller number of clubs. The argument, I know, is that these supporters won't go elsewhere but that means we're only losing the odd 100 here and there.

Why should Stranraer be given entry to your league but Stenhousmuir be denied? Stenny's crowds are bigger than Stranraer's. Stirling, who you also mention, get a couple of hundred more, not many at all.

The phrase a 'better concentration of players' is meaingless. If players who played for Stenny and Albion Rovers were good enough to play at a higher level then they will be signed up by a better team - this would be the same whether you had a league of 36 or 42. Clubs like Stirling Albion and Queen of the South are not sitting around saying 'if only all the best players weren't playing for Albion Rovers or Stenhousmuir we'd be in the SPL!'.

Clubs in the Third Division aren't the problem in Scottish football. The problem is that clubs higher up in the leagues have squandered money and wasted opportunities in the last decade and more. Binning a few teams from the SFL won't make the SPL a better league, it won't make the national team perform better and it won't add any more fans to the gate.

if the product changes then the SPL should be negotiating for a bigger sponsorship deal aswell as bigger TV rights & Marketing. These smaller teams will now have, in theory, easier games to pick up more points and thus if more money pours into the SPL then there wil be more money paid out the further up the league you will finish so it ends up a better product from the outside and very few teams will actually lose money.

Let's be clear - the SPL will not get a bigger TV deal by admitting Dundee, Ross County, Caley and Partick Thistle. The combined average gate of these four clubs this season is around 12,000 - even if every single one of these people signed up to ESPN HD it would be a paltry ammount. No significant number of customers are going to sign up for pay TV to watch sides like us, Dunfermline, Partick etc. All ESPN, Sky et al are interested in is showing Rangers and Celtic games as they are the only one's that will attract significant audiences. Maybe (a big maybe) if Aberdeen or one of the Edinburgh clubs made a sustained title push (like Hearts in 2005/06) they might get an audience but the clubs outside the 'Big Five' are insigificant. Setanta's viewing figures for games like us v Accies last season or St Mirren v Falkirk were notoriously low.

[Harry Chibber]

if the product changes then the SPL should be negotiating for a bigger sponsorship deal aswell as bigger TV rights & Marketing. These smaller teams will now have, in theory, easier games to pick up more points and thus if more money pours into the SPL then there wil be more money paid out the further up the league you will finish so it ends up a better product from the outside and very few teams will actually lose money.

Let's be clear - the SPL will not get a bigger TV deal by admitting Dundee, Ross County, Caley and Partick Thistle. The combined average gate of these four clubs this season is around 12,000 - even if every single one of these people signed up to ESPN HD it would be a paltry ammount. No significant number of customers are going to sign up for pay TV to watch sides like us, Dunfermline, Partick etc. All ESPN, Sky et al are interested in is showing Rangers and Celtic games as they are the only one's that will attract significant audiences. Maybe (a big maybe) if Aberdeen or one of the Edinburgh clubs made a sustained title push (like Hearts in 2005/06) they might get an audience but the clubs outside the 'Big Five' are insigificant. Setanta's viewing figures for games like us v Accies last season or St Mirren v Falkirk were notoriously low.

I don't think he is aiming this directly at the fans of the promoted clubs but the idea of a 16 team league having more appeal as a product to the general population & international fans. At the moment 12 teams playing each other 4 times + during the season is repetitive and unnecessary. More teams = more variety of stadiums, managers opinions, fans and most importantly (for Sky & ESPN) opponents for the OF. The playoffs would also produce greater interest at the end of the season and have more movement between leagues because at the moment 1 up 1 down is stale and offering no differentiation to the SPL product.

At the end of the day we need to try something because at the moment the SPL is dire viewing and clubs are failing financialy because of it.

[starchief]

Why should Stranraer be given entry to your league but Stenhousmuir be denied? Stenny's crowds are bigger than Stranraer's. Stirling, who you also mention, get a couple of hundred more, not many at all.

Because Stranraer (for instance) is a community club (and, as I said, I'd like a league of the larger teams and more community centred clubs). Stenhousmuir has other clubs right on it's doorstep, e.g. Falkirk, so doesn't serve either isolated places nor could they ever seriously challenge in the upper leagues. Stranraer fans don't have the option of that. They represent a particular area. A smaller amount of teams mean the community clubs would be playing larger clubs, so their money would increase, as would their staff by simply playing against better teams regularly.

The phrase a 'better concentration of players' is meaingless. If players who played for Stenny and Albion Rovers were good enough to play at a higher level then they will be signed up by a better team - this would be the same whether you had a league of 36 or 42. Clubs like Stirling Albion and Queen of the South are not sitting around saying 'if only all the best players weren't playing for Albion Rovers or Stenhousmuir we'd be in the SPL!'.

Not what I meant. Albion Rovers or Stenhousmuir might have a few decent players for their level, plus a number of lesser lights. Stirling Albion and Queen of the South much the same. Take out 2 from 4, then those players would be available to these clubs. I don't mean SPL level players, just a better standard of Division Two player.

Clubs in the Third Division aren't the problem in Scottish football. The problem is that clubs higher up in the leagues have squandered money and wasted opportunities in the last decade and more. Binning a few teams from the SFL won't make the SPL a better league, it won't make the national team perform better and it won't add any more fans to the gate.

I disagree. We'll have two leagues of the best players, with less journeymen. There will be less games of unambitious team versus unambitious team, where the crowd is 100 or less, so it'll be more exciting. Teams like Morton won't have to dread falling into a division where to have ambition means virtual bankruptcy, as even going full-time is difficult enough with the small crowds brought by opposition teams.

Combine the two league system with summer football, then we have a better league, the national team performing better and more fans at the gate.

[caleyboy]

St J chairman has said he would vote against the change.

[eileanacheoICT]

Walter Smith has voiced his support.

[Renegade]

Is it not still the case that ICT support a 10 team SPL?

[Joe DiMaggio]

Is it not still the case that ICT support a 10 team SPL?

When did we ever?

I would sincerely hope not that is the worst set up out of the lot of them! I would be happy with the way it is but with playoffs introduced because 1 up 1 down is terrible for any league.

[ictchris]

Because Stranraer (for instance) is a community club (and, as I said, I'd like a league of the larger teams and more community centred clubs). Stenhousmuir has other clubs right on it's doorstep, e.g. Falkirk, so doesn't serve either isolated places nor could they ever seriously challenge in the upper leagues. Stranraer fans don't have the option of that. They represent a particular area. A smaller amount of teams mean the community clubs would be playing larger clubs, so their money would increase, as would their staff by simply playing against better teams regularly.

What do you mean by "community club"? Because Stranraer are geographically far away from other senior clubs they have more right to exist than Stenhousmuir? More people support Stenhousmuir than Stranraer, Stenny have had a bigger average crowd than Stranraer over the last ten years by miles just about every year. Stranraer are actually one of the poorest supported teams in Scotland - so far this year their average crowd is probably less than Clach's! What sort of area are they serving? You say that Stenny have clubs on their doorstep so would be booted out under your system but the reason there are quite a few clubs in that area is that there are plenty of reasonably sized towns there. Larbert, Stenhousmuir, Camelon, Denny - these are reasonably big places, lots of people live in Central Scotland, hence there are more teams.

What you are suggesting is the franchising of football and that certainly wouldn't work at the level you are talking about in Scotland.

Not what I meant. Albion Rovers or Stenhousmuir might have a few decent players for their level, plus a number of lesser lights. Stirling Albion and Queen of the South much the same. Take out 2 from 4, then those players would be available to these clubs. I don't mean SPL level players, just a better standard of Division Two player.

Good players will usually end up at clubs at a higher level, that'll be the case whether Albion Rovers are playing in the West Region Juniors or the Third Division. What's stopping Stirling and Queens signing all these hidden gems now? Nothing. Simply removing clubs from the league won't result in the resources (players, fans, coaches etc) being shared out among the remaining clubs. the good players will always rise to the top, no matter what the structure is.

I disagree. We'll have two leagues of the best players, with less journeymen. There will be less games of unambitious team versus unambitious team, where the crowd is 100 or less, so it'll be more exciting. Teams like Morton won't have to dread falling into a division where to have ambition means virtual bankruptcy, as even going full-time is difficult enough with the small crowds brought by opposition teams.

Combine the two league system with summer football, then we have a better league, the national team performing better and more fans at the gate.

Going by current league standings you would have a lower league of Raith, Morton, Ayr Utd, Airdrie, Alloa, Stirling, Cowdenbeath, Brechin, Peterhead, Stenhousmuir, Dumbarton, East Fife, Arbroath, Clyde, Livingston, East Stirling, Forfar and Berwick. Is that so much more attractive and exciting than the set up we have at the moment? I don't think that the clubs who you would jettison (Queens Park, Annan, Albion Rovers, Stranraer, Elgin and Montrose) have many players who could add to the clubs staying in the league. Do you think that the existing SPL clubs and fans would be fired with enthusiasm about being joined by Dundee, us, County, partick, Pars and Queens?

The only way to improve Scottish football is to improve the quality of play. The only way to do that is for clubs to be better run, to make better commercial decisions and to use this to sign better players. Expelling a few teams into the non-league set up or the Juniors wouldn't do anything to help this.

[Scarlet Pimple]

A Larger SPL is required for obvious reasons. --May happen.

Then a merger between ICT and County, with games to be played at Tulloch. Rationalisation makes perfect sense . Smile.

Then reduced prices introduced

The Old Firm beatles off to England.

Will not happen.

[Council Juice]

How many times have the OF stopped any changes going through?

unless they agree it wont happen.

But they need the Scottish game more than the Scottish game needs them. Time to call their bluff.

Now they do, seeing as England wont have them unless they agree to start from the bottom. I still cant see why they dont see the benefits as the OF game will again become a good game to watch. seeing it happen 4-7 times a season kinda takes the shine off it aswell.

And for the thing that the SPL have said about the seeking their own TV deals is bang out of order. Hopefully they will be stupid enough to do it and get expelled from the SPL.

Teams all around Europe have their own Tv deals. Im sure Ajax, Barca and Real all have them. Old Firm just want to follow suite. No harm in that.

I would love this to happen but it wont. The OF carry too much power in voting shares. Every club is supposed to have 1 vote on a board if 12 and a 75% vote is needed for anything to pass. Unfortuanately the OF carry 5 votes each so if the other 10 voted yes and the OF vote no then its split 50/50 and nothing will happen. Has happened since the dawn of the SPL and until their voting power is removed there will be no chance of changing anything.

You seem to post a lot of nonsense half of the time and just blatantly make things up the other half. Where did you get that lot of guff from? Was it just made up again?

The old firm do not get 5 votes each, every club get 1 vote and and it was changed a few years back from an 8-4 vote needed to pass something to a 11-1 vote.

I thought it was changed to a 8-4 from an 11-1 rather than the other way around as the Old Firm could just vetoe everything previously. Now 5 teams need to object. Im pretty sure we had a 10-2 vote for us coming into the SPL which stopped us but then it was changed. Ken Mackie paid a few boys a few visits and we got a vote that took us into the SPL.

I'd be in favour of two leagues of 16/18 then revamp everything else into 2 regional leagues. North and South. With winner of each coming into the 2nd league. and the runners up entering into playoffs with 2nd bottom teams.

As for the 2 top leagues. 3 up, 3 down from the SPL. Makes it interesting.

Winners, runners up automatically and SPL2 play-off winners (teams 3-6).

And just get rid off the Split. Bring in a start of season 2 leg or one off League Super Cup. Winners and Runners up of top flight.(satisfies the old firm with extra game etc)

[cal234ey]

Personally I would prefer an 18 team league. A 16 team league would lead to 8 less games a season than currently i.e 4 home games. The current SPL clubs would lose money on these 4 less games as well as having to share to TV money and also play the old firm once less at home per season. All this loss in revenue would only increase the chance of the division being expanded. The 18 team league would at least offer 2 additional home games that the 16 team one would not.

Also The 18 team league wouldn't be that much worse quality than the 16 teams. As it stands currently (assuming teams that needed to would improve stadia and install undersoil heating) the teams that would be promoted would be: ICT, County, Dundee, Partick, QOS & Dunfermline all of which are of an equal standard.

What would you do to the lower leagues if this expansion was confirmed?

[Renegade]

One of the things for me has always been that, whether you like County or not (probably not), having the Highland Derby in the SPL would be brilliant.

[caleykid1994]

One of the things for me has always been that, whether you like County or not (probably not), having the Highland Derby in the SPL would be brilliant.

its a better game to watch compared to that crap ive had to endure in this celtic daft household each season

[donald]

One of the things for me has always been that, whether you like County or not (probably not), having the Highland Derby in the SPL would be brilliant.

its a better game to watch compared to that crap ive had to endure in this celtic daft household each season :(

I dunno - I certainly didn't enjoy watching us get well and truly humped by Ross County in the first home derby game of this season

[caleykid1994]

One of the things for me has always been that, whether you like County or not (probably not), having the Highland Derby in the SPL would be brilliant.

its a better game to watch compared to that crap ive had to endure in this celtic daft household each season :D

I dunno - I certainly didn't enjoy watching us get well and truly humped by Ross County in the first home derby game of this season :D

true but atleast we were beaten by a team who wanted the win, unlike the old firm which just played it to death and got lucky with that 93rd minute goal

[ICTPaisley]

If the SPL was to change and allow a 16 team league meaning 30 games instead of the usual 38 then why not revamp either the scottish cup or league cup? A 4 team group phase for example. This would start having everyone from the third division right through to the SPL with a seeding system for dividing the groups out. This will add extra games and much needed revenue with the top 2 teams qualifying for the knockout stages which then turns into the regular cup as we know it either half as many teams.

Having those extra 8 saturdays off could then mean the League cup could be played on a saturday instead which may also improve crowds for those games.

[caleykid1994]

If the SPL was to change and allow a 16 team league meaning 30 games instead of the usual 38 then why not revamp either the scottish cup or league cup? A 4 team group phase for example. This would start having everyone from the third division right through to the SPL with a seeding system for dividing the groups out. This will add extra games and much needed revenue with the top 2 teams qualifying for the knockout stages which then turns into the regular cup as we know it either half as many teams.

Having those extra 8 saturdays off could then mean the League cup could be played on a saturday instead which may also improve crowds for those games.

I like that cup idea. Would probably bring in some much needed revenue for the lower ranked teams aswell. Good idea