Proposed new league structure

[Alex MacLeod]

http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/football/20997587

 

The bit I dont understand

 

 

If the proposed changes are voted through, the winners of the new second tier stand to earn £387,000.

 

 

How do they determine the winners of the second tier if the top four play off with the bottom four of first tier?

[CaleyD]

http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/football/20997587

 

The bit I dont understand

 

 

If the proposed changes are voted through, the winners of the new second tier stand to earn £387,000.

 

 

How do they determine the winners of the second tier if the top four play off with the bottom four of first tier?

 

Obviously it's the second tier from the 8-8-8 as that is how the season ends.

[Kingsmills]

Am I now going to have to rely on my children to explain how the league system works as well as for IT advice ? Was there something amiss with teams playing each other home and away each season with the best winning the league and the worst heading down through the relegation trapdoor ?

[Tichy_Blacks_Back]

Quite simply not the answer. Will this be the most convoluted league structure in Europe?

[+bughtmaster]

There are tried and tested league systems all over the world most to my knowledge are basically the same. Why do we have to try and invent something different ?

If it aint broke dont try and fix it, try a system that is proven to work.

[Rival]

Ridiculous SFL

[Kingsmills]

Think you will find that the SFL proposal was quite sensible. This nonsense is being driven by the SPL.

[starchief]

Am I now going to have to rely on my children to explain how the league system works as well as for IT advice ? Was there something amiss with teams playing each other home and away each season with the best winning the league and the worst heading down through the relegation trapdoor ?

What is so complicated? Basically, if you are in the top league, then at halfway, you are either in the top league with the rest of the top league or you are in the second league, without getting relegated, with teams from the top league and the second league. If you finish at the top then you are in the top league. But if you are at the bottom, you get relegated from the second league into the second league. Unless, of course, you were in the second league, whereupon you play teams from the top and second league in the second league, where you might be promoted into the top league or finish at the bottom of the second league, whereupon you will play in the second league next season. Therefore, if you win the second league, you either get promoted in the top league or you stay in the top league from the second league, depending if you were in the top league prior to the second league - although of course, as your team was never relegated from the first league into the second league, that means no promotion from the second to first, as you were already in it, unless you weren't.

[CaleyD]

Think you will find that the SFL proposal was quite sensible. This nonsense is being driven by the SPL.

 

SFL proposal was a non starter as a 16 team league only gives you 30 games....clubs could not afford to lose revenue from 4 home games a season.

[GaliantGrunt]

can we instead of a top 6 , just have a top 8 !!

The bottom 4 can fight it out playing each other twice (2 relegated)

[bishbashbosh]

big discussion on open all mics today.

alan preston asked the same question and john robertson questioned it also.

what happens to the trophies for 1st div 2nd div etc.

teams in "championship" are not playing to win a league any more they are playing for 4 promotion places

 

macnamara at partick pointed out that a team who are adrift at the bottom of the spl before the split and no chance of being in the top 8 would then  play youngsters and keep their experienced/ better players fit and ready for the 14 games after the split. while the other 3 in pos  9,10,11 would have to use the better players all the time to try and get into the top 8 to avoid the playoffs

 

richard gordon thought a pennant would be given to the winner of the middle eight

 

 at 17:30 on the new phone in that has replaced traynors your call, most of the questions from fans were about rangers not getting promoted this year.

 

the new set up is all about revenue.

 

thomson at dundee utd reckons they will lose 700,00 quid not playing old firm twice if new system is brought in.

 

this system is copied from switzerland/belgium  and they ditched it after a few years

[CaleyD]

There's a lot of misinformation and questions doing  the rounds, which means people can't really make a properly informed/educated decision for themselves.

 

Those championing the new setup really do need to get their act together and start communicating/marketing the whole thing a lot better if they want to avoid a situation where people will give up on the idea before it's even had a chance to demonstrate for itself whether it's good or bad.

[starchief]

this system is copied from switzerland/belgium  and they ditched it after a few years

Ah, so the top teams will get a few years to minimise losses, declare it isn't working, then move back to 12 teams just in time for 4 Old Firm matches to get back on the agenda.

Is that the method in the madness?

[Gabby]

There's a lot of misinformation and questions doing  the rounds, which means people can't really make a properly informed/educated decision for themselves.

 

Those championing the new setup really do need to get their act together and start communicating/marketing the whole thing a lot better if they want to avoid a situation where people will give up on the idea before it's even had a chance to demonstrate for itself whether it's good or bad.

So what you are saying is the difference between a good idea and a bad idea is a communication/marketing plan?

[CaleyD]

No, what I am saying is that people cannot establish an educated opinion without communication/marketing.

[+DoofersDad]

I think I'll take a minority viewpoint here and say that I'm actually quite taken with the proposals.  Previously I've been in favour of a league of more than 12 but I think there are sufficient positives here to overcome that.  In no particular order, advantages include:-

 

• Meaningful games for nearly all teams for most of the season.
• The opportunity for half the teams  in the top two leagues of 12 to play against a total of 15 different sides in the year.
• Potential for up to 4 sides to get promoted each year.  This is likely to provide far more movement of clubs through the structure so it won't be a constant round of playing the same clubs year after year.
• A real incentive for clubs to maintain standards or else they will find themselves dropping down the structure.
• The introduction of a pyramid structure which will bring fresh blood in and get rid of the dross at the bottom.
• The re-introduction of standing at matches in the top flight.
• Amalgamation of the SPL and SFL management structures into a single body.
• Rangers will remain in the bottom flight again next season.

It's not perfect but few things are.  The problem we have in Scotland is that we are a small country and simply don't have the population to support sufficient big clubs necessary to make a really competitive top tier league.  In my view there are some real advantages here, most important of which is the way it will freshen things up and provide real opportunity for smaller clubs to move quickly through the leagues.  This will force other clubs to make sure they maintain their standards. 

 

There have been a lot of comments about teams resting players late in the first half of the season when it is obvious which group of 8 they will be in.  That will probably happen but then it happens now!  For instance,within the current set up as soon as it is clear that County are not going to be top 6 then they will have nothing to play for.  With Dundee being cast adrift they are likely to have the last third of the season planning for next season and experimenting in matches which could have a major significance for other teams.  In any case, why would clubs rest many players around the mid point of the season?  Players need to be match fit and to play together as a team to be best prepared for the crucial end of season games.  One of the reasons we are doing so well this season is that we have a generally settled team.  Keeping the team playing together might be the smart move.

 

To be honest, I don't know how similar this structure is to those which have failed elsewhere and I would be interested to learn why similar systems have been scrapped elsewhere.  But for the moment, these proposals look to me to be the best that have been proposed for years and there is an opportunity to revitalise football in Scotland.  In the absence of any alternatives offering significant change, I think these should be seriously considered but we really do need to see a bit more detail and get a better understanding of the implications before we can come to any firm views.

 

 

[CaleyD]

That's pretty much where I am at in my thoughts, DoofersDad.

 

It's not my preferred choice of setup, but I've resigned myself to the fact that we're not going to get a 16/18/20 team top tier....and although I don't have all the information to hand, I can kinda see why moving straight from what we have to that would generate financial issues which rarely get a mention when the issue is being discussed by fans.

 

As I've said elsewhere...the status quo is not working and everyone wants rid.  For that reason I see the new proposal as progress, because the only workable alternative from what I can gather is going back to a 10 team top league.

 

The bit that worries me most about the proposals is the 18 team third tier which is going to generate a shed load of travel for smaller teams....and the expense that comes with that for clubs and fans.  They'd be better inviting in another two teams and splitting that into two regional leagues of 10.

[+DoofersDad]

Very sensible suggestion to split the bottom tier into regions. I'd go with that.

[ilpadrino]

...

 

The bit that worries me most about the proposals is the 18 team third tier which is going to generate a shed load of travel for smaller teams....and the expense that comes with that for clubs and fans.  They'd be better inviting in another two teams and splitting that into two regional leagues of 10.

 

This.

[12th Man]

I think its workable and will bring more interest, as into the extra travel for the bottom 18 clubs as its a  34 game season,   which means 17 away games

as with a 10 club format  its 36 games  so it equates to 18 away games.

 

I looked at  how the leagues could be split north south years ago  and it didnt really work out that well,  you could have the 2 Stirling clubs playing in different leagues or both in the North or both in the South  If you take Elgin, Phead, Montrose, Brechin,Forfar, Arbroath plus the fife clubs, by the time you reach 10 clubs  the boundary is as far down as Stirling and will keep shifting depending on which North South club gets promoted relegated.

[cal234ey]

This system just totally does not work. Absolutely horrific suggestion. For example if we take this season's SPL table, almost half the clubs are at the 22 game mark where the leagues would be split leading to the top 8 being: Celtic, ICT, Motherwell, Hibs, Aberdeen, St Johnstone, Kilmarnock and Dundee Utd. In that group you have no Highland derby, no Edinburgh derby, no Dundee derby and still no Celtic v Sevco that the broadcasters/Neill Doncaster want.

 

Then take the middle 8 teams which would consist of: Hearts, St Mirren, County, Dundee, Morton, Dunfermline, Partick Thistle and Livingston. Again a worrying lack of derby matches to keep the broadcasters interested. Also how would fans of the 4 clubs from the SPL for example feel about having shelled out for an SPL price season ticket expecting games against Celtic and Hibs but instead playing half the season against Livingston and Partick. The only option there would be for clubs to sell a ST for the first half of the season and one for the second half but this would lead to an incredible drop in revenue if you did not make the top 8.

 

Also in this middle 8 could anybody realistically see much of a change in the top 4 spots after the second half of matches is complete. County and Dundee this season in the SPL are the bottom 2 clubs, they were better than Morton, Partick Thistle and Livingston last season so should finish above them again over 14 games. Worst idea ever.

[Heilandee]

I'm in the "any change is better than no change" camp. I'm also of an age that i can remember 18 team leagues and the mind numbing non games that format throws up for the second half of the season.This suggestion seems a tad convoluted at first glance but i can see the merits and think it's certainly worth a go with a few tweaks.

I can see the concern re season tickets as you don't quite know what your buying into,that said, the constant changing of fixtures (after Sat v Hibs, we don't have another Saturday KO till ICT on the 9th Mar) and late call offs with no consideration for supporters etc will ensure the continued downward spiral of ST sales, but hopefully  more interesting and competitive games would see more pay at the gates.

[Rival]

This system just totally does not work. Absolutely horrific suggestion. For example if we take this season's SPL table, almost half the clubs are at the 22 game mark where the leagues would be split leading to the top 8 being: Celtic, ICT, Motherwell, Hibs, Aberdeen, St Johnstone, Kilmarnock and Dundee Utd. In that group you have no Highland derby, no Edinburgh derby, no Dundee derby and still no Celtic v Sevco that the broadcasters/Neill Doncaster want.   Then take the middle 8 teams which would consist of: Hearts, St Mirren, County, Dundee, Morton, Dunfermline, Partick Thistle and Livingston. Again a worrying lack of derby matches to keep the broadcasters interested. Also how would fans of the 4 clubs from the SPL for example feel about having shelled out for an SPL price season ticket expecting games against Celtic and Hibs but instead playing half the season against Livingston and Partick. The only option there would be for clubs to sell a ST for the first half of the season and one for the second half but this would lead to an incredible drop in revenue if you did not make the top 8.   Also in this middle 8 could anybody realistically see much of a change in the top 4 spots after the second half of matches is complete. County and Dundee this season in the SPL are the bottom 2 clubs, they were better than Morton, Partick Thistle and Livingston last season so should finish above them again over 14 games. Worst idea ever.

Completely agree

[ForzaCaley]

I desperately want to see change. Part of me wants to go ahead with these plans because i want to see change but part of me recognises it is completely ridiculous. Also this structure has been tried, tested and failed in other countries. I can see a situation where the top 8 is mildly exciting (for those at the top, which in a couple of years will be the OF). The middle 8 doesnt change anything and the bottom 8 will be desperately boring!

Also i dont understand the modern conception that a 16/18 top tier will bring competition. Looking back through history between WW1 and the 1950s only Motherwell won the league apart from the OF in a 18 team league. Also there was even more non-competitive games, thats why they changed the structure in the 70s. We're a club that traditionally finish 7th/8th/9th. In a 18 team league which we'll never win and never get relegated from will mean we will always be mid table with nothing to play for. Doesnt sound exciting to me. And lets be honest, we love the Highland derbies and we're used to playing county 4 times a season. Why would we want to restrict that to two times a season? I dont think thats very wise financially for our club to just have one home game a season v county.

If i had my way, i would propose a Premier of 10 teams and a Championship of 10. Both these leagues are professional. That would leave 22 lower league teams, so i would split it and add 5 HL teams and 5 EoS/junior teams to make a semi-professional North and South leagues of 16 teams each. The winners of these leagues would have a play-off with the winner replacing the bottom club of the championship. Also the top 2 of the championship will be automatically promoted replacing the bottom 2 in the Prem. The third top championship team would then play off with the 3rd bottom prem team (like what they do in Germany).

I really believe having a 10 team top tier would be exciting and even more competitive than any other suggestion. Growing up in the 90s i remember the 10 team prem being exciting and often the title and relegation place were not decided untill the last day or last couple of games at least. In the 80s aberdeen won the league 3 times, DUFC once and Hearts very nearly all in a 10 team league. Even when rangers were romping the leagues in the 90s aberdeen and Motherwell ran them very close. Like i said earlier, imaging we were middle of the table 6th with 4 games to go. We're only 2 points ahead of 8th placed play-off but also only 3 points behind 4th placed europa league and having to play title chasing Celtic next. We would be going into a game knowing if we lose we could be down, or if we win enhance our chances of europe whilst stopping Celtic win the league (remember 2011 and how good that felt?). I remember 2 years ago a German guy did a study into Scottish football and proposed a professional premier and championship of ten teams each as the right model for Scotland based on population, statistics etc. Everyone laughed and said he was ridiculous and so was the SPL for getting this guy to do a study. However lets be honest, its very rare that the Germans are wrong when it comes to Football!!

[ForzaCaley]

Forgot to mention i would have the bottom clubs of the North and South leagues have a play off with the champions of the HL and EoS league.