SPL reconstruction

[SMEE]

I havent really read thro this thread. But just wanted to air my view. And that veiw is, Im one of the peeps wanting the SPL EXPANDED....to possibly 16 teams, not shrunk to 10. Thats a joke! Fook knows where this latest idea has sprung from....as far as i knew...expnsion was the preffered option?

[Scotty]

We just have to have summer football though. Big name loan stars from the Premiership, people like Cowie coming back for the close season to ICT to stay fresh. Games in the sun. Why is it taking so long??

No big name player from any league would go on loan over thier close season. It wouldn't keep them fresh at all, it would burn them out. No club would allow it and no player would even consider doing it.

And don't use Beckham as an example becasue the MLS has a shorter season and longer close season than the leagues in Europe and he was only doing it to try and force his way into the england side. It is a totaly different scenario in Europe.

Having watched "summer football" for the last 4 seasons in MLS where the season starts in late March/Early April and runs into October for all teams and possibly to the end of November for those who make it all the way through the playoffs to decide the championship, I would say it would be a bad idea for a number of reasons, mostly to do with global fixture dates.

UEFA/FIFA dates are heavily based around a 'traditional' European calendar. For those leagues who shift the timing of their seasons it may bring benefits (weather being one) but it also brings loads of problems.

In MLS I think it is fair to say that at least half a dozen times per season, TFC lose 6 or more players on each FIFA or CONCACAF date and most of the MLS games scheduled for those dates still go ahead because of the relative shortness of the season and lack of dates available for rescheduling. One one particular date TFC lost 9 players to international duty and MLS would not reschedule the match despite TFC having to register two of their coaches and to draft in a 39 year old utility player from what would be the equivalent of Clach. If you cannot get the whole of Europe to change to summer football then Scotland, and quite possibly the fans of Scottish teams would potentially be at a similar disadvantage.

With regards to players from other leagues coming up on loan ... I think Joe is right. Beckham was a special case as he did it to retain his England place. And although Landon Donovan followed his example a year later by going to Everton there are loads of potential problems in this. The biggest one is the transfer window ? Would we have variable windows ? When Beckham went to Italy in 08/09, LA Galaxy were furious when they discovered he would not be back for the start of the 2009 MLS season in April. He is the "franchise player", and with sponsorship and endorsements galore for both himself and the team based on his presence, whether he plays or not, they stood to lose a substantial sum. The simple reason he could not play for LA Galaxy that year until the end of June ? The European transfer window was closed. The North American one was open, but he couldnt move back until the European one opened. So to use the example of Don Cowie .... when the English window opened at the end of June do you think he would come here for July and a little bit of August until the English season restarted or would he rather go on a well earned break .....

There are also two other things to consider in this equation .... What if his club thought he might be sold to one of the OF in the coming season? He could not play for two clubs in the same league in the same year without special clearance? would they think it wise to go through all the extra paperwork for a 6 week transfer? and what about the chance of injury?

At the end of the day I support the idea for change, and moving the season a few weeks earlier to give some leeway for a winter break might also be a good idea, but not moving it by months. I do have a problem with a 10 team league though. It basically means that every single team other than Celtic / Rangers are fighting relegation from day 1 of each season. The 12 team league and the split may well be a farce (and it is), but this season, we would regard it as a tremendous achievement to make the top 6 and play out our season without fear of relegation and with 5 'meaningless' games (in terms of the championship) against the likes of Celtic, Rangers, Hearts etc.

I support a 16 team league, in fact 3 leagues of 16 rather than 10-10-10-12. Thats 6 more ambitious teams from the juniors or non-league allowed in and more excitement .... Each team plays the other once at home, and once away, guaranteed. no silly splits and no messing around with the natural way a league should function. 2 teams promoted and two teams relegated from divisions above/below and a further two teams above or below that to be involved in playoffs. teams given 12 months to make stadium compliant with the league above if there is a criteria in place so they can use higher income from that league to offset the costs, bottom league should also allow promotion/relegation to/from the junior or non-league ranks.

As the number of league games could potentially be reduced from 36 or 38 down to 30, an enhanced regional cup could also be looked at which would hopefully offset some of the income issues.

Fans like their club to win things, and to be involved in edge of the seat nailbiters .... so better structure to the cups, more chances for lower league clubs to progress via playoffs or winning their leagues and less barriers to that progress is key for me as opposed to what will become yet another stagnation scenario.

[cal234ey]

Ok a 16 team league will never get voted through because for change to happen, the vote must be 11-1. You will not under any circumstances get 11 clubs voting for 4 less home games a year and less home games against the teams with big away supports i.e The OF and Hearts.

As for an 18 team league, if we go by last years final placings, the league would be the current 12 in the SPL plus Falkirk, Dundee, Dunfermline, QoS, County and Partick. This does not seem that bad as the majority of them have played in the SPL before so have the requirements. But for season 2, if it was 3 up, 3 down as it should be then you would end up with the likes of Raith, Airdrie, Ayr, Stirling or Cowdenbeath in the top flight. Is that what we really want? Celtic beat Aberdeen 9-0 this year how many do you think they would put past these teams? We ourselves put 7 past Ayr last year. This would 100% without a doubt weaken the top flight. And would you also insist that these teams have 6,000 seater stadia?

For me the changes that should be made would be for the season to start two or three weeks earlier to allow for a winter break. Also i would love for the SPL to follow the German model and reintroduce controlled terraces to games. These clubs in Germany show that these terraces can be safely controlled with large numbers of fans. Teams should also drop out of the 3rd Division as part of a new pyramid structure.

If people really see the need for change, then the only idea that has a chance of being voted through by 11-1 is the 14-team league.

[Scotty]

Ok a 16 team league will never get voted through because for change to happen, the vote must be 11-1. You will not under any circumstances get 11 clubs voting for 4 less home games a year and less home games against the teams with big away supports i.e The OF and Hearts.

Revamp the cups .... make earlier rounds a group stage so small teams can make a bit of coin, make later rounds home and away .... there are plenty of ways to get more games if you think about it .... and with regard to games against bigger teams ..... no team is guaranteed these .... Do you think Aberdeen budgeted (or projected) being bottom six this season and losing out on 5 big games to end the season?

But for season 2, if it was 3 up, 3 down as it should be then you would end up with the likes of Raith, Airdrie, Ayr, Stirling or Cowdenbeath in the top flight. Is that what we really want?

If they are good enough, then why not !!! All that statement proves is that you want to stagnate Scottish football and prevent smaller teams from having ambition and reap the rewards for achieving that ambition ... its that kind of attitude that kept Highland teams out of the senior setup for decades.

For me the changes that should be made would be for the season to start two or three weeks earlier to allow for a winter break. Also i would love for the SPL to follow the German model and reintroduce controlled terraces to games. These clubs in Germany show that these terraces can be safely controlled with large numbers of fans. Teams should also drop out of the 3rd Division as part of a new pyramid structure. If people really see the need for change, then the only idea that has a chance of being voted through by 11-1 is the 14-team league.

I agree about the German 'safe standing areas' idea and it is something Toronto FC fans are also pushing their owners and MLS about.

How does your 14 team league work ? Is that play each other 3 times for 39 games or is it some other format with a split? Cant see how it works out with an even split of games other than by using the same SPL model which is to try and obtain a balance of home and away games over the course of TWO seasons.

[cal234ey]

Ok a 16 team league will never get voted through because for change to happen, the vote must be 11-1. You will not under any circumstances get 11 clubs voting for 4 less home games a year and less home games against the teams with big away supports i.e The OF and Hearts.

Revamp the cups .... make earlier rounds a group stage so small teams can make a bit of coin, make later rounds home and away .... there are plenty of ways to get more games if you think about it .... and with regard to games against bigger teams ..... no team is guaranteed these .... Do you think Aberdeen budgeted (or projected) being bottom six this season and losing out on 5 big games to end the season?

But for season 2, if it was 3 up, 3 down as it should be then you would end up with the likes of Raith, Airdrie, Ayr, Stirling or Cowdenbeath in the top flight. Is that what we really want?

If they are good enough, then why not !!! All that statement proves is that you want to stagnate Scottish football and prevent smaller teams from having ambition and rewards for achieving that ambition ... its that kind of attitude that kept Highland teams out of the senior setup for decades.

For me the changes that should be made would be for the season to start two or three weeks earlier to allow for a winter break. Also i would love for the SPL to follow the German model and reintroduce controlled terraces to games. These clubs in Germany show that these terraces can be safely controlled with large numbers of fans. Teams should also drop out of the 3rd Division as part of a new pyramid structure. If people really see the need for change, then the only idea that has a chance of being voted through by 11-1 is the 14-team league.

I agree about the German 'safe standing areas' idea and it is something Toronto FC fans are also pushing their owners and MLS about.

How does your 14 team league work ? Is that play each other 3 times for 39 games or is it some other format with a split? Cant see how it works out with an even split of games other than by using the same SPL model which is to try and obtain a balance of home and away games over the course of TWO seasons.

My point is if the teams are good enough then of course 100% let them in but are they realistically good enough? right now i don't think so. Of course i don't want scottish football to stagnate but I personally don't see the benefit of potentially having part time teams in the top flight.

Also if you look at attendances for cup games they are generally lower than those of home league games so therefore although there are more games not necessarily as high attendances as you would get. Also if you get knocked out early on then you miss out on all these extra games.

The 14 team league is not my idea and nor am I a particular fan of it but realistically i believe it is the only plan that will get enough votes. the idea is to play once home and once away against each team i.e 26 games then split in to a top 6 and a bottom 8 and play each side a further two times in your section. Personally i feel this is no better than what we currently have.

[Bridge_Ender]

16 or 18 teams is never going to happen, the current SPL clubs are never going to vote for less income from big travelling supports. The realisation of the need for change is underway though and the sweetener, if you like, is the First Division becoming SPL 2 and the parachute payments becoming more generous, something we know ourselves is vital given the skeleton operation ICT worked with last year. The rest of the proposals - starting earlier, winter break, play offs, etc. are all good ideas which could definitely help make the game more appealing to fans. I'd love to see Summer football in it's entirety but the problems with the European and International calendars are, realistically, probably too great.

One major question is what happens to those clubs outside the SPL structure as there are really going to be only 20 professional teams in the country? What role does the SFL now have if the leagues are to be regionalised? There already are regional Senior Leagues (Highland, East and South of Scotland) so do the clubs drop into enhanced versions of these or does another set up form? Will the long called for pyramid structure become a reality and the top Junior clubs will have the opportunity to progress through the leagues now?

With the next instalment of Henry McLeish's report due, it could be a very interesting time...

[Scotty]

My point is if the teams are good enough then of course 100% let them in but are they realistically good enough? right now i don't think so. Of course i don't want scottish football to stagnate but I personally don't see the benefit of potentially having part time teams in the top flight.

Caley Thistle were part-time for quite a few seasons .... as we progressed, that changed and based on the ambition shown by the club we are now rightfully a full time team in the country's top division. There is absolutely nothing to say other teams cannot follow a similar model and by the time they achieve promotion to the top flight be in a similar situation as ourselves ... but they need to have some incentive to actually make that progress.

Just like we talk about "youth" being our future in terms of fans, and trying to encourage them to support ICT, we should not overlook the smaller teams within the SFL when trying to look at a solution that will benefit all. Having come from non-league origins to the SPL in 10 years or so, and with our one season dalliance with relegation, ICT fans are well qualified to be able to appreciate that progress could and should bring rewards and just how massive a gulf there is when things go pear shaped.

there are plenty of teams in the 3rd who never do anything, and yes there are those in the 2nd and 1st whose sole purpose seems to be to yo-yo between divisions, but we should be fostering re-development of the game over all leagues so those teams who perpetually finish at the bottom of the 3rd might have some consequences, and those teams who are ambitious, either within the current setup, or somewhere in the juniors or non-league setups can have a goal and achieve a reward for reaching that goal.....

if you look at attendances for cup games they are generally lower than those of home league games so therefore although there are more games not necessarily as high attendances as you would get. Also if you get knocked out early on then you miss out on all these extra games.

Thats why I suggested 'group stages' for early rounds ... just like the Champions League did to increase income (and TV revenue/programming) in that competition for teams not expected to make it further. You dont go out in the group stages so you are guaranteed a certain number of games. OK, the Scottish Cup may not rake in the mi££ions that the CL does, but every penny helps for smaller teams and you just need to look at the crowds Caley or Thistle might draw for games in the Scottish Cup when we were in the HFL as an example ... as for going out early - in the knockout stage - thats no different to how it is now !!! I would suggest it would probably be higher end D1 or SPL teams that would be straight into the knockout stages so they would stand/fall on results in the same way as they do now ... except they would have it over two legs not one. I would also suggest the official attendances are somewhat of a 'red herring' given that gates are shared and most people wonder about the authenticity of the figures announced for many games !

The 14 team league is not my idea and nor am I a particular fan of it but realistically i believe it is the only plan that will get enough votes. the idea is to play once home and once away against each team i.e 26 games then split in to a top 6 and a bottom 8 and play each side a further two times in your section. Personally i feel this is no better than what we currently have.

So 36 games for the top 6 (13+13+5+5)and 40 for the bottom 8 (13+13+7+7). I can see the logic -- 4 more games for bottom 8 so more home games and more revenue, but still two less games for the top 6 and at least 1 less home game.

The whole idea of a split just seems to be over complicating what should be a straightforward process .... but I do agree with you, its the sort of daft idea that might be acceptable to those in control of the accounts !

[ICTPaisley]

A while back i posted a topic which had a good idea on a league restructure for the game Football Manager. Although this is for a game the restructuring is very in depth and looks very attractive. It also shows the 16 team leagues that Scotty mentions with a group stage in cups for making up the numbers.

http://community.caleythistleonline.com/topic/17561-football-manager-2010-fans/page__p__249095__hl__golspie__fromsearch__1#entry249095

[dan_ict]

Summer football - yes

10 team SPL -

Edited December 13, 2010 by dan_ict

[12th Man]

Why does the man from st monte say yes, does st mirren have delusions of grandure, why are they on the board

looking back over the last few seasons if it was to come in to effect that year, the teams in 11 and 12 would be removed,10 relegated and 9 and 8 involved in play offs

Year-----Removed-------------relegated----------playoffs

10--Falkirk,Killy-----------St Mirren-------Aberdeen--ST Johnstone

9---ICT, St Mirren----------Falkirk---------Hamilton--Killy

8--Gretna,Killy-------------St Mirren-------ICT--Hearts

7--Dunfermiline,St Mirren---Motherwell------United--ICT

04--Partick,Aberdeen--------Killy------------Livvy --Hibs

03--Well,United--------------Partick--------Livvy--Aberdeen

02--St Johnstone,Well-------Hibs------------Dundee-Dunfermiline

As you can see no one is immune from a bad season, if they want to improve Scottish football, I dont think some clubs can ride the storm of not only relegation but failure to bounce back up within 2 years, so I assume the entertainment is supposed to come from doing all that you can from stopping your club from hitting the wall.

Will board members resign after all less clubs need less people running it, I would suggest a marathon, the slowest get kicked out, what do you mean you need the money, bye bye.

[MissICT]

There are a few points I agree with and a few I don't! Not a fan of the two 10 team leagues! 4 old firm games a season. how boring! Would much rather a bigger league. Don't like the earlier start as it's during the holidays so many people will be away however if it means a winter brake I would be in favour of it as the winter has already caused problems this season.

[DALNEIGHCALEY]

http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/football/scot_prem/9282788.stm

[bdu98196]

A 10 team top flight wil be worse than even now, still playing each other 4 times yet not even the 'excitement' of trying to go for a coveted top 6 position for the split.

While increasing to 16/18/20 will reduce revenue against the OF, its got to mentioned that looking at the teams over the last few years who have got promoted/relegated, I think its fair to say that at least 6 teams from D1 would hold their own against the lower 5 or 6 in the SPL in terms of quality. The biggest problem in Scotland like much of Europe (even the Eng Prem) is that its the same teams every year getting into the Champions League thus making the cash and increasing the wealth gap over the rest of that league - this is even more of an issue whan you have a huge fan base differential liek the OF. UEFA are part of the problem with uncompetitive leagues, look at the Eng Prem, teams like Man City need investment of ?100M's just to break into the 'big 4' and historically they have been in the Champions League almost every season for the last 10 years.

Anyways point is, that to improve Scottish football the leagues need to be more competitive. The lower divisions need to be looked at with teams being forced to merge as we have too many part-time clubs with only a few 100 fans, its just not sustainable. Or the lower divisions are regionalised north/south?

[Huisdean]

Two simple things would help to make Scottish football more cpmpetitive, and hopefully more attractive before the leagues are evn tinkered with

Go back to sharing gate receipts so money is distributed more evenly

Share TV monies equally between the clubs.

We simply need to make the leagues, in whatever format, more competitive and this would go a long way to doing this. Chances of this happening however - none.

[DALNEIGHCALEY]

Two simple things would help to make Scottish football more cpmpetitive, and hopefully more attractive before the leagues are evn tinkered with

Go back to sharing gate receipts so money is distributed more evenly

Share TV monies equally between the clubs.

We simply need to make the leagues, in whatever format, more competitive and this would go a long way to doing this. Chances of this happening however - none.

Care to explain why the teams with big home supports should split gate receipts with clubs that take a couple of hundred fans at most to games ?

[Scotty]

Disagree about sharing gates, but do agree about TV or other sponsorship monies ....

Not sure if it is still the same but every team used to be guaranteed 4% of the sponsorship money (48% total), the remaining 52% was shared out based on position with 1st place getting 13% and 2nd place getting 11%. As we know who is going to finish in those two positions most year, it is easy to spot that two teams are getting a huge premium over anyone else (32% of total revenue). 3rd place gets 5.5%, 4th gets 4.5% and then each place drops by 0.5% after that with 12th getting 0.5% on top of their guaranteed 4%.

In some figures I have seen this meant that 1st place would get a payout approaching ?3,000,000 over the season and 12th place would get around ?750,000

Looking back over some of my files, I also note that the current suggestion for SPL reconstruction is almost identical to one presented to the SPL AGM in 2006 and which was born back at a strategy day in 2003 before we were even in the SPL the first time .... and the financial model has the top two in a 10 team league now taking 35.6% of the total revenue instead of 32% so radical change as it might sound or be spun, its just more of the same !!!

[FoolPhysio]

Plus ?a change .. .

[CaleyD]

History shows that having more money doesn't improve anything. In fact, it could be argued that the sport was in a far better position prior to the days of multi million pound signings and large TV deals.

[Hiro]

A 10 team league would not solve any of the problems really. I was under the impression that one of the drivers for change was to improve the overall quality as well as ensuring that youngsters are given more opportunities. However, the proposals make a mockery of that. By decreasing the number of teams and adding in an extra relegation slot it's hardly going to encourage teams to give youth a shot considering the number of high pressure games they may be subject to (1 in 5 chance of being in the relegation/playoff zone). Not only this but the added pressure will surely affect the quality of football as there will be so much at stake.

Furthmore, it can only exasberate the financial problems in Scottish football - Higher chance of relegation = maybe spend a few quid extra on wages to pull yourself out = staying up but being financially mauled/going down and being financially ruined.

Not great. I also find it highly suspicious that Mr Doncaster's and Mr McLeish's proposals are almost identical. I smell the influence of the infirm.

[PullMyFinger]

Cut and paste from P&B.

As you might know, in the last week, the SPL have made their own proposals for the future of football in Scotland, and this was followed today (Thursday 16th) by the second part of Henry McLeish?s report. We will all have our own views about what each has proposed, but one thing that is clear is that neither has consulted widely and directly with Scottish football fans. As William Gaillard (UEFA Director of Communications) pointed out at a Supporters Direct Conference in 2009, if we only have players then we only have an amateur game. To have a professional game, there must be fans. So that the fans voice can be clearly heard, Supporters Direct are conducting a survey seeking views on a number of aspects of the McLeish and SPL recommendations. You can find this at : http://www.surveymonkey.com/s/scottishfootball , and I would ask you to take the time (5-10 minutes tops) to complete this survey. However, I would ask one more thing ? to send this link to everyone in your contacts list and ask them to fill out the survey. Supporters Direct are advertising the survey on all club forums, and other football notice boards (e.g. Pie and Bovril) ? however, by filling out the survey yourself, and encouraging as many others as you know to do the same, you can help make the survey as representative as possible of fan opinion in Scottish football. Please help.

It's surely worthwhile completing the survey if there's the slightest chance someone takes heed? I have my doubts though.

http://www.surveymonkey.com/s/scottishfootball

[starchief]

Just to add McLeish doesn't actually favour a 10 team league playing each other 4 times a season (he favours a 14 team league). Consultations with the TV companies and clubs meant the option of 4 times a season was the only one they would support financially. His take on it was then, ok, what's the best I can do with that?

You may say he should have asked fans and ignored those companies but he didn't feel that was in the best interests of Scottish football to take that line. I can understand the logic.

[PullMyFinger]

So the fans take a back seat in matters relating to the spectator sport that is Football. Do the clubs make more money from TV companies or through the turnstile?

[Hiro]

BBC article

Glad to see that we along with Killie, Dundee United and Hearts appear to be the leading dissenters to a 10 team league. Good on the board!!

[Caley Stan]

Glad to hear we're opposing the 10 team nonsense. Jim Spence states that clubs in opposition "want further discussion on league sizes while also exploring new play-off proposals, such as exists in the Eredivisie in the Netherlands". This suggests a larger league with Euro play-offs may return to the agenda. I certainly hope so. Since the required majority is 10-2, what's to stop everyone else sticking it to the Old Firm by including 2nd place in the play-offs?

[sneckfan]

I saw the quotes from Terry Butcher in the paper after yesterdays game. He said that he would pay money to watch players like Templeton then went on to say that in a 10 team league teams would be too worried to bring youngsters through with more fear of relegation.