Proposed new league structure

[Alex MacLeod]

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?

First of we've only had derby's for two seasons out of the last nine so I wouldn't say we were used to playing County 4 times a season. This season I predict we will play them three times in league. The cup draw and replay was a bonus. If Dundee get their act together this window then we may not be playing the shadows next season.

[ForzaCaley]

And 7 of the first 10 we played county four times a season with crowds regularly reaching 5000 which tbh the club needs the revenue. Tell me alex would you rather the club just play county once and get the revenue of one crowd of 6000 or play twice and get the revenue from 12000?

[Alex MacLeod]

What I'd rather and what we can depend on are two different things. Looking at the league at the minute I dont think we can budget for playing derbies next season. County are being payrolled above their earnings at the moment and its not working for them. I dont see McGregor continuing to provide his own cash and they will need to budget within their means.

It would be great if both teams could remain in the top half of the top league forever but I just cant see it happening.

[12th Man]

It would offer a greater deal of protection for clubs facing relegation, if you look only a couple of seasons back  a decent club got relegated  on 37 points,  in the modern day set up  that club would have more of a chance to stay up,  if Dundee were 20 points behind by game 22  they have been thrown a lifeline  come the split. 

[CaleyD]

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.

 

With the current split you are not guaranteed your derbies either and as it's a 50/50 split with 6 teams in each you are even less likely to get them than you are with the new setup where you would keep two thirds of the top tier intact.

 

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.

 

Why is that any different from what we have at the moment?  You buy your season ticket without guarantee of 4 games against any team.  Personally, whilst I would be disappointed to see us in the bottom 4 come the split, I'd actually be looking forward to a second half of the season against some new opposition and a chance to visit some different grounds.  I'm also not so sure the drop in crowds argument holds much water....you're team are effectively starting afresh and pushing for promotion back to the top tier for the new season.  A scenario that is far more likely to get fans out supporting their team than the many meaningless bottom 6 clashes that we have at present.

 

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.

 

I've never agreed with the standpoint that there's a huge gulf between top half of Div 1 and bottom half of the SPL, so I think games will be far more competitive than you give credit for.  What's more, because the split is due to come at the start of January, teams will have the transfer window in which to make preparations for the remainder of the season as they'll know where and who they will be playing against.  A situation that doesn't exist at present and one which will allow the middle tier to become even more competitive and exciting.

[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.

 

With the current split you are not guaranteed your derbies either and as it's a 50/50 split with 6 teams in each you are even less likely to get them than you are with the new setup where you would keep two thirds of the top tier intact.

 

>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.

 

Why is that any different from what we have at the moment?  You buy your season ticket without guarantee of 4 games against any team.  Personally, whilst I would be disappointed to see us in the bottom 4 come the split, I'd actually be looking forward to a second half of the season against some new opposition and a chance to visit some different grounds.  I'm also not so sure the drop in crowds argument holds much water....you're team are effectively starting afresh and pushing for promotion back to the top tier for the new season.  A scenario that is far more likely to get fans out supporting their team than the many meaningless bottom 6 clashes that we have at present.

 

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.

 

I've never agreed with the standpoint that there's a huge gulf between top half of Div 1 and bottom half of the SPL, so I think games will be far more competitive than you give credit for.  What's more, because the split is due to come at the start of January, teams will have the transfer window in which to make preparations for the remainder of the season as they'll know where and who they will be playing against.  A situation that doesn't exist at present and one which will allow the middle tier to become even more competitive and exciting.

 

 

Point 1: Currently you are guaranteed three derbies a season for each one where the new proposal only ensures there are two so therefore are guaranteed 1 more derby a season as it stands.

 

Point 2: With regards to the drop in crowds could you tell me what our average 1st Division attendance was a few seasons back and any of our recent SPL average attendance. Which is higher? And the year in the 1st division was when we were chasing promotion and the time in the SPL with the exception of this season has included plenty "meaningless bottom 6 clashes" so I feel that argument holds plenty of water.

 

Point 3: It isn't that big a gulf as yet but I do feel it is only getting wider. The last 3 teams promoted from SFL1 - County, Dundee and Dunfermline. Dunfermline got relegated. County and Dundee currently occupy the two bottom spots. Dunfermline who were relegated have experienced extreme financial difficulties yet are still within touching distance at the top of the league. We were relegated and bounced straight back   something that was supposed to be impossible to do but seems to be becoming easier why? Because the gap is widening.

[bishbashbosh]

http://sport.stv.tv/football/clubs/aberdeen/209239-explained-how-the-scottish-football-league-reconstruction-model-would-work/

 

Prizes

In theory, there would be six distinct competitive groups to be won. There would be the ultimate prize, the league championship, which the winners of the Title Group would be awarded.

The winner of the Premiership's first phase, which ends after 22 games, may also be rewarded, as may the winners of the Championship first phase, the team finishing top in the Play-off Group and the team which is in first place in the Relegation Group.

The winners of the National League would also win a trophy.

It is understood the SPL and SFL are keen to incentivise each element of the season in order to give teams the sense of playing for something, even if they are in Relegation Group in the second phase.

 

 

Has this model been tried before?

The system was tried in Austria 20 years ago but lasted only eight seasons and was not considered to be a success.

Switzerland also adopted a similar model, running from 1988. Falling attendances and a drop-off in TV money and sponsorship led to it being abandoned in 2003.

More recently, Georgia introduced the 8-8 split. However, below the top-flight Umaslegi Liga the second tier is in two groups, so the top two from each entered the promotion/relegation group.

This year, Georgia has modified the set-up, keeping a top flight of 12 but now introducing a 6-10 split after two rounds.

[Alex MacLeod]

Average Div 1 crowd in season 09/10 was 3509

Average SPL crowd last season was 4023

Average so far this season is 3891

Edited January 13, 2013 by Alex MacLeod

[CaleyD]

Point 1: Currently you are guaranteed three derbies a season for each one where the new proposal only ensures there are two so therefore are guaranteed 1 more derby a season as it stands.

But you're only guaranteed one home derby...so no change in that regard.

 

Point 2: With regards to the drop in crowds could you tell me what our average 1st Division attendance was a few seasons back and any of our recent SPL average attendance. Which is higher? And the year in the 1st division was when we were chasing promotion and the time in the SPL with the exception of this season has included plenty "meaningless bottom 6 clashes" so I feel that argument holds plenty of water.

Alex has given the figures....this year is also, to date, higher.

 

Point 3: It isn't that big a gulf as yet but I do feel it is only getting wider. The last 3 teams promoted from SFL1 - County, Dundee and Dunfermline. Dunfermline got relegated. County and Dundee currently occupy the two bottom spots. Dunfermline who were relegated have experienced extreme financial difficulties yet are still within touching distance at the top of the league. We were relegated and bounced straight back   something that was supposed to be impossible to do but seems to be becoming easier why? Because the gap is widening.

The biggest "gap" between the two leagues is a financial one and this is being addressed under the new setup which, as I understand it, will see an additional £1 Million (minimum) being filtered down in order to address the situation. The new financial model, again as I understand it, will also go some way towards levelling out the distribution of funds with the top two places getting less and each position below that getting the same, or more, than they get at present....this goes all the way down through all 24 places in the top tiers.

[Alex MacLeod]

In the first season of this set up the bottom four from top div will likely have the added incentive of keeping Sevco out of top league for following season.

[+DoofersDad]

No team has any guarantees of any derbies at all.  You will get a derby if your local rivals just happen to be in the same division as you.  You are more likely to get derbies the more teams there are in the league but if you have fewer teams in the league and play other sides more than twice, when you do get derbies you get more of them.  Assuming that two different league set ups result in the same total number of matches then things will average out that you have the same number of derbies.

 

I appreciate that this mathematical fact gets distorted in that some derbies will occur more often than others according to which structure you have.  In the current set up, for instance, you can expect Hibs and Hearts ubsually to both be in the top flight and therefore get a lot of derbies, but on the other hand East Stirling never get a derby against their Falkirk rivals. 

 

What the proposed new set up would do is to increase the movement between the divisions to allow derbies between sides that rarely get them at the moment.  The other side of that is that there may be some years when there is not a derby that almost always occurs with the current set up.  So if Hearts end the first half of the season in the bottom 4 and end up getting relegated then it would mean no derby the next season.  All that does is make the next derby when it does occur that much more tasty.  The greater variety of derby fixtures can only be good for the game IMHO.

 

If you want more derbies, the only way you can guarantee that is to have a regionalised structure and that is a no brainer for the top flight.  But, as CaleyD says, it makes real sense as an alternative to the proposed 18 club 3rd tier.  (Rangers playing in the 3rd Division West next season has a nice ring to it!)

 

I also don't buy the argument about season tickets.  I appreciate that folk would be buying into a bit of an unknown package but aren't they now?  At the moment you don't know how many home games you are paying for, you have no idea which clubs you may see twice or only once and you have no idea whether you will see end of season matches which will see the club fighting for a European place or relegation or whether they are relatively meaningless middle of the table matches.

 

I'm not hearing anything peruasive to suggest this proposal is not worth exploring further.

[Alex MacLeod]

(Rangers playing in the 3rd Division West next season has a nice ring to it!)

 

 

They wont though. The proposals, if accepted, would come into effect from 2014/15 season. Assuming Sevco are in top two of div 2 next season they will be in Championship tier when new set up comes into effect.

[CaleyD]

They're trying to push this through for next season. Alex.

[ICTPaisley]

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.

I agree with this.  I know a few Junior sides that feel making the step up will ruin them.  The best junior side from the West is Auchinleck Talbot, could you imagine them having to travel to Elgin and Peterhead every other saturday.  A lot of the fans from the Juniors and EOS,SOS leagues would like the option to deny promotion,  I'm not sure how the highland league are taking this but they do not feel making the step up is worth it at this moment.  This could be a problem and would make a mockery of the set up in suggestion.

 

The lower 18 should be regionalised into two leagues of 10, automatically promoting two non league sides to make up the difference geographically.

[Alex MacLeod]

I cant see how they can. They talk of getting agreements. Sorting out the ruling bodies and consulting with fans etc. They also have no idea yet how the pyramid system will work. Far better to take time and get it right

[ICTPaisley]

To be up to standard with current division 3 standards there is a lot of work to be done in most grounds.  Money which these clubs just don't have.  The fans enjoy being able to watch their club for £5/£6 on a saturday and instead of travelling the entire country only have to drive around 20 miles.  They are also worried that if they are brought into the new pyramid system their attendances will not only drop because of the price increase it will also decrease due to no longer being a big fish in a small pond.  Typically numbers will drop when a team isn't winning most weeks like they have been used to for a number of years.  I know a few clubs in the west juniors that can average higher crowds than some division 3 clubs at the moment and its all due to the cheap day out and the reasonable chances of being successful. 

 

Not all players who play for these clubs are that willing either i've heard.  They like being able to train on Monday and Wednesdays and playing on the Saturday at a relatively close away ground.  They aren't so keen on taking the step up as they have their real jobs to think about and that's sometimes why a few players for the SFL eventually take the step down to the lower non league setup.

 

Regional's above their level is the only sensible option or you will have the problem of teams rejecting promotion.  I think i'm right in saying Holland has brought in a pyramid system and teams have already rejected promotion for various reasons.

Edited January 13, 2013 by ICTPAISLEY

[CaleyD]

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.

I agree with this.  I know a few Junior sides that feel making the step up will ruin them.  The best junior side from the West is Auchinleck Talbot, could you imagine them having to travel to Elgin and Peterhead every other saturday.  A lot of the fans from the Juniors and EOS,SOS leagues would like the option to deny promotion,  I'm not sure how the highland league are taking this but they do not feel making the step up is worth it at this moment.  This could be a problem and would make a mockery of the set up in suggestion.

 

The lower 18 should be regionalised into two leagues of 10, automatically promoting two non league sides to make up the difference geographically.

I won't name names as I'm saying this from memory and don't want to inadvertently misquote anyone, but I've talked to 3 managers/ex-managers from lower league & Highland League who have made the same point as you.

 

There's a good few clubs out there who are fairly happy with where they are at because they have a setup which works and stretching to compete at higher level would destroy them.  What they are/were hoping to get from reconstruction was a regional setup which would, as you say, increase the number of local games (derby matches) and reduce travelling because those are the games which draw the crowds and bring in the money needed to operate.

 

Personally I get a little fed up with the constant attempts to "fix things from the top down" in Scottish Football and just as much, if not more, attention needs to be given to the lower, junior, amateur etc leagues so that things are being fixed from the bottom up and so that we have a strong product down there in which to feed both players and interest in the game to the upper leagues....and let's not forget the need for home grown talent for the National squad!!!

 

There might not be enough money in the game to filter much more down to that level, but there's things that can be done to save these clubs money and give them the opportunity to grow themselves....this is the ideal chance to put some of these things into place.

[CaleyD]

I cant see how they can. They talk of getting agreements. Sorting out the ruling bodies and consulting with fans etc. They also have no idea yet how the pyramid system will work. Far better to take time and get it right

 

Alex made a funny

[Alex MacLeod]

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.

I agree with this.  I know a few Junior sides that feel making the step up will ruin them.  The best junior side from the West is Auchinleck Talbot, could you imagine them having to travel to Elgin and Peterhead every other saturday.  A lot of the fans from the Juniors and EOS,SOS leagues would like the option to deny promotion,  I'm not sure how the highland league are taking this but they do not feel making the step up is worth it at this moment.  This could be a problem and would make a mockery of the set up in suggestion.

 

The lower 18 should be regionalised into two leagues of 10, automatically promoting two non league sides to make up the difference geographically.

But its ok for Berwick to travel to Peterhead just now. They wouldn't be travelling those distances every week anyway.

 

The junior teams should have the option to opt out.

[ICTPaisley]

 

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.

I agree with this.  I know a few Junior sides that feel making the step up will ruin them.  The best junior side from the West is Auchinleck Talbot, could you imagine them having to travel to Elgin and Peterhead every other saturday.  A lot of the fans from the Juniors and EOS,SOS leagues would like the option to deny promotion,  I'm not sure how the highland league are taking this but they do not feel making the step up is worth it at this moment.  This could be a problem and would make a mockery of the set up in suggestion.

 

The lower 18 should be regionalised into two leagues of 10, automatically promoting two non league sides to make up the difference geographically.

But its ok for Berwick to travel to Peterhead just now. They wouldn't be travelling those distances every week anyway.

 

The junior teams should have the option to opt out.

It's ok for Berwick as thats what they want.  The junior sides want to either stay where they are or be able to win promotion to another regional league.  I can see teams like East Stirling being saved from being relegated most seasons as its not financially viable for a team to replace them.  

[Alex MacLeod]

I cant see how they can. They talk of getting agreements. Sorting out the ruling bodies and consulting with fans etc. They also have no idea yet how the pyramid system will work. Far better to take time and get it right

 

Alex made a funny

BBC should get the credit..not me. http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/football/20993710

[cal234ey]

Here are some statistics from the leagues stupid enough to implement 12-12 then 8-8-8 half way through:

 

Switzerlands averages for the top 12, which became a top 10:

[12-12 splitting 8-8-8]
1997-98... 6,594
1998-99... 5,832
1999-00... 5,651
2000-01... 6,204
2001-02... 7,291
2002-03... 7,779
=============== reduced to top 10
2003-04... 9,025
2004-05... 8,305
2005-06... 7,993
2006-07... 9,673
2007-08... 10,917
2008-09... 8,697
2009-10... 11,059
2010-11... 11,365
2011-12... 12,253


and for the second 12, which became a second 16:

[12-12 splitting 8-8-8]
1997-98... 1,472
1998-99... 984
1999-00... 1,669
2000-01... 1,338
2001-02... 952
2002-03... 1,202
============== expanded to second 16
2003-04... 1,316
2004-05... 1,417
2005-06... 1,718
2006-07... 1,358
2007-08... 1,127
2008-09... 2,018
2009-10... 1,214
2010-11... 1,691
2011-12... 2,004

(No figures on EFS for pre-1997) 

 

Austria's figures for the top 10, which became the top 16 then top 12, then the top 10:

1975-76... 4,777
1976-77... 4,616
1977-78... 3,888
1978-79... 3,592
1979-80... 4,725
1980-81... 5,344
1981-82... 5,104
============= expanded to top 16
1982-83... 4,615
1983-84... 3,422
1984-85... 3,169
============= moved to 12-12 splitting 8-8-8
1985-86... 2,613
1986-87... 3,245
1987-88... 3,396
1988-89... 2,998
1989-90... 3,261
1990-91... 3,467
1991-92... 3,306
1992-93... 3,708
============== reduced to top 10
1993-94... 2,910
1994-95... 3,532
1995-96... 4,907
1996-97... 5,354
1997-98... 4,533
1998-99... 5,906
1999-00... 7,702
2000-01... 6,480
2001-02... 6,043
2002-03... 5,285
2003-04... 7,216
2004-05... 6,757
2005-06... 7,664
2006-07... 8,022
2007-08... 9,338
2008-09... 9,013
2009-10... 7,873
2010-11... 7,953
2011-12... 7,075 

[CaleyD]

As I understand it, there were other issues with those leagues....can't be ersed going to check for certain, but I believe at least one of them had a 2 point win system and one of them had some convoluted formula so that teams in middle league kept a proportion of points at the split.

 

Not saying we should totally ignore what happened with these leagues, but need to be careful of viewing them as a direct comparison.

[ICTPaisley]

Am i right in saying the pyramid structure would allow one team to be promoted?  I heard they are maybe going to combine the East and South leagues with a couple teams added from the west to make an entire Southern League so the winner of that would then play the Highland league winner in a playoff to decide who wins promotion.  Now if this is the case and say the highland league team wins the promotion and a southern team is relegated from the 3rd division what happens then?  Does the Highland league play with one less team and the Southern League accommodates another space from say 10 to 11 or 20 to 21?

[cal234ey]

As I understand it, there were other issues with those leagues....can't be ersed going to check for certain, but I believe at least one of them had a 2 point win system and one of them had some convoluted formula so that teams in middle league kept a proportion of points at the split.

 

Not saying we should totally ignore what happened with these leagues, but need to be careful of viewing them as a direct comparison.

 

Possibly I'm not overly sure and can't really be bothered digging that deep. But I feel it is as close as we can get for a comparison and we certainly need to tread very carefully about voting this through.