St Mirren say "No"

[cal234ey]

Very disappointed that this wasn't voted through.  Financially, it would have been a better package.  At first reading I thought the structure was crazy but once I got my head around it I really liked the concept.  It would have been much more exciting than the current structure. 

 

I'm reading on various social media such as Twitter that ICT fans are complaining that the club didn't consult them.  I live in Glasgow now but I was well aware of the open meeting with CJT that was advertised on here, the official website, and elsewhere.  I couldn't attend but read all the documentation from the meeting.  Happy that Kenny voted yes but it's a shame it wasn't enough for others. 

 

How?

 

More money is would be redistributed from the SPL to the SFL so ICT would see a reduction in money through this avenue. 12-12-18 results in 36 games for the top 24 teams so that equals 1 less home game per season than now so again less money for the club.

 

Sponsors are not gone to be queueing up to invest money in this product any more than they would now as it is still the same clubs just a different league system. So I don't see how it can possibly be financially a better package for us. Glad it has not gone through.

[CaleyD]

[Rasczak]

Stewart Milne hasn't got a leg to stand on. It was him and his club that stopped the 11-1 majority vote from being changed earlier in the season. Ironically enough, if he had voted for it then, league reconstruction would have been passed through today.

 

Despite the many good parts of the plan (redistribution of money, playoffs, pyramid structure) the abomination of the planned splits, especially the middle 8, was ridiculous. How can you expect clubs to be able to sell season tickets at the start of the year not knowing what mini-league they would be in. Here you go guys, get your season tickets, we might have another game against Celtic, we might have one against Morton. Who knows!

What like it has been for the last 15 years ?

 

For the likes of Dundee this year, who knew they weren't going to make the top 8, they could have sat back, made sure they avoided suspensions, injuries etc and basically only turn up for the last part of the season. And the likes of Ross County this year wouldn't have made the top 8 and look where they are now! And it was a farce that if the whole thing DID get voted through and it turned out to be a complete disaster, nothing could be changed for 3 years.

Who said it couldn't be changed for 3 years ? Who ever told you that was wrong. What was in the original proposal was that any structure changes within 3 years needed a larger majority than most other changes. If everyone wanted to change after the first year it could be done.

From the reports, even that was removed and changes to structure would be on the same majority as everything else so the single sticking point that St Mirren gave as the reason for saying no was removed and they still said no.

 

Personally I think we should retain the current league structure but introduce the good ideas: redistribution of money, playoffs, the pyramid structure, one governing body, and the 9-3 voting majority. The current split has generated plenty of excitement over the years. Granted, the last 5 games can be meaningless if you are in the bottom half and have already secured survival, but think of the excitement of not knowing who would make the top 6 in the previous 33 games before it.

But to get the good points above that would help the lower end, there had to be compromise from the higher end, as they would lose out. You were never going to get the money redistribution without there being something in it for those giving up the biggest share of money. So you couldn't just cherry pick what you like as not everyone would cherry pick the same things and so there would have been no chance of getting what you want.

 

Hopefully now this means Doncaster will be resigning. I will personally drive him and Regan back to wherever the hell they came from.

And will you take Stuart Gilmour with them ? The St Mirren vote seems to me to have been about them being convinced they would have been in the middle 8 nearly every season, and then losing out on potential home games with the big teams, Celtic, ICT etc. Thing is if that is their normal position then they likely miss out on that game anyway, and if we went with a 16 team league, once home and away, then they definitely miss it.

Yes 12-12-18 is not perfect, but there is no perfect solution for everyone. I posted some thoughts on a possible format last It gave a top 16 with playoffs at top and bottom, and although some here liked some of it, there were some points that probably would never be agreed on by enough teams.

This was a chance to get the bits that most fans want, fairer distribution of money, playoffs, pyramid system, with a compromise on how we got there and making it easier to tweak later if it wasn't working. It seems to me some teams, and people, couldn't see that we needed to take a little pain in the short term, to make it better long term.

[Kingsmills]

 

 

 

Finally, the 11-1 voting structure has to be changed to no more than 9-3. It is no longer any secret that the structure was brought in so that no important change colid be effective without the consent of both members of the Old Firm. I can't, for the life of me, understand why all the current members of the SPL apart from Celtic have not changed the voting structure already.

 

 

They voted to change the voting structure today as well.  Two Chairmen voted No.  Gilmour and MacGregor.  The 11-1 voting structure stays.

 

The proposal to change the voting structure was for very limited purposes to do with further league reconstruction. It was offered at the last minute as a sop to the two dissenting chairmen who, thankfully, didn't fall for it.

[+DoofersDad]

The current system (not just the league structure) is rotten to the core and we desparately need change.  What is wrong with the system is evidenced by the fact that clubs were given the option of all or nothing.  Obviously clubs might be for a change in the voting structure and against the restructuring proposals but were simply not given the option of voting separately on the issues.

 

In my view, the current system with the 11 - 1 vote for change means that no meaningful change is ever going to happen.  I appreciate that a lot of fans don't fancy the league structure as proposed, but frankly, that was just a side issue in this sorry state of affairs.  Voting for change today would have seen a change to the voting structure, the development of a pyramid structure and the first steps towards a much more sensible structure for the game.  OK, so with that comes a league reconstruction which a lot of folk don't like but let's face it, there is no consensus around what folk actually do like.  What was wrong with giving it a try?  It just might have worked!  And if it didn't work, at least we would then have the mechanism in place to change it.

 

All this opportunity for change has been lost because 2 club chairmen have messed up big time.  And please don't give me this crap about Uncle Roy standing up for his principles and listening to the fans - since when have the County fans been in favour of the 11 - 1 voting system?

 

I've had a lot of respect for MacGregor in the past but that's gone I'm afraid.  He's sold Scottish football down the river.  Rangers will soon be back at the top table and it will back to square one.  A sad day for Scottish Football IMHO. 

[old caley girl]

Finally, the 11-1 voting structure has to be changed to no more than 9-3. It is no longer any secret that the structure was brought in so that no important change colid be effective without the consent of both members of the Old Firm. I can't, for the life of me, understand why all the current members of the SPL apart from Celtic have not changed the voting structure already.

 

They voted to change the voting structure today as well.  Two Chairmen voted No.  Gilmour and MacGregor.  The 11-1 voting structure stays.

[/quote

The proposal to change the voting structure was for very limited purposes to do with further league reconstruction. It was offered at the last minute as a sop to the two dissenting chairmen who, thankfully, didn't fall for it.

Source? I think this is incorrect.

[Kingsmills]

 

cjt_reconstruction_dj.jpg

 

Yes and all that could have happened without the need for the other elements that proved so devisive.

[cal234ey]

 

Stewart Milne hasn't got a leg to stand on. It was him and his club that stopped the 11-1 majority vote from being changed earlier in the season. Ironically enough, if he had voted for it then, league reconstruction would have been passed through today.

 

Despite the many good parts of the plan (redistribution of money, playoffs, pyramid structure) the abomination of the planned splits, especially the middle 8, was ridiculous. How can you expect clubs to be able to sell season tickets at the start of the year not knowing what mini-league they would be in. Here you go guys, get your season tickets, we might have another game against Celtic, we might have one against Morton. Who knows!

What like it has been for the last 15 years ?

 

For the likes of Dundee this year, who knew they weren't going to make the top 8, they could have sat back, made sure they avoided suspensions, injuries etc and basically only turn up for the last part of the season. And the likes of Ross County this year wouldn't have made the top 8 and look where they are now! And it was a farce that if the whole thing DID get voted through and it turned out to be a complete disaster, nothing could be changed for 3 years.

Who said it couldn't be changed for 3 years ? Who ever told you that was wrong. What was in the original proposal was that any structure changes within 3 years needed a larger majority than most other changes. If everyone wanted to change after the first year it could be done.

From the reports, even that was removed and changes to structure would be on the same majority as everything else so the single sticking point that St Mirren gave as the reason for saying no was removed and they still said no.

 

Personally I think we should retain the current league structure but introduce the good ideas: redistribution of money, playoffs, the pyramid structure, one governing body, and the 9-3 voting majority. The current split has generated plenty of excitement over the years. Granted, the last 5 games can be meaningless if you are in the bottom half and have already secured survival, but think of the excitement of not knowing who would make the top 6 in the previous 33 games before it.

But to get the good points above that would help the lower end, there had to be compromise from the higher end, as they would lose out. You were never going to get the money redistribution without there being something in it for those giving up the biggest share of money. So you couldn't just cherry pick what you like as not everyone would cherry pick the same things and so there would have been no chance of getting what you want.

 

Hopefully now this means Doncaster will be resigning. I will personally drive him and Regan back to wherever the hell they came from.

And will you take Stuart Gilmour with them ? The St Mirren vote seems to me to have been about them being convinced they would have been in the middle 8 nearly every season, and then losing out on potential home games with the big teams, Celtic, ICT etc. Thing is if that is their normal position then they likely miss out on that game anyway, and if we went with a 16 team league, once home and away, then they definitely miss it.

Yes 12-12-18 is not perfect, but there is no perfect solution for everyone. I posted some thoughts on a possible format last It gave a top 16 with playoffs at top and bottom, and although some here liked some of it, there were some points that probably would never be agreed on by enough teams.

This was a chance to get the bits that most fans want, fairer distribution of money, playoffs, pyramid system, with a compromise on how we got there and making it easier to tweak later if it wasn't working. It seems to me some teams, and people, couldn't see that we needed to take a little pain in the short term, to make it better long term.

 

 

From my post No.65: The split just now is only for 5 games which is ~13% of the season. The proposed split is for 14 games which is ~39% of that season. The two splits are completely incomparable. How can you prevent teams from having a shot a European qualification after only 3/5ths of the season? Absolute madness. Also the split in the SPL is pre-defined you don't know who it will be exactly but you know it will contain 6 SPL clubs in each section meaning by virtue of being an SPL club you will play SPL teams for the whole season. This proposed idea meant that you could start the season in the SPL have any chance of a late push removed and to then finish your SPL season playing against SFL1 clubs every second week.

 

The 11-1 system used to protect things in the new structure means change is effectively prevented look at how well this voting structure has prevented change in the SPL all these years. The only concession made was to change the 9-3 regarding the structure of the league only and not the other 11-1 protected items in the package.

 

I don't see anything in it for the teams that are giving up money. Credit to them for attempting to do so but I am yet to see a benefit for them. The new structure has 1 less home game for them than the current SPL. The money is redistributed down the leagues as well. So income is lowered on both fronts there for the top clubs. There is the potential for an increased chance of relegation so again the SPL clubs near the bottom could lose out and again lose money. This new system is not going to significantly increase gates or commercial income to cover these losses.

 

Comparing to a 16 team league is irrelevant as it will never be implemented.

[davie]

 

So that's it then, no change in a game that seeks a new major sponsor this year and has to look again at tv rights soon. No change in a game that at least we can all agree is dying by degree in this country. Dying because we couldn't try something new by simply altering with a points resetting a split in the league that we already have anyway and we could have altered after three years. No change in the cash distribution (how many more clubs after Dunfermline will we be saying goodbye to?) No pyramid that allows genuine progress on merit. No change to a derided 11:1 voting system. Why? because of the utter self interest of the two chairmen of two clubs who thought that they might be at risk of ending up in that split group and couldn't see the bigger picture.

It's a shame that the picture has been clouded by the single issue of a bigger SPL. It simply isn't sustainable because the fans that have shouted loudest are those of clubs who are at the greatest risk of losing out on SPL status. They're not coming through the turnstiles in greater numbers, they're not investing in their clubs and they're not offering credible alternatives even after the clubs did their bidding last summer. They are just sitting in the back of the cave, afraid to come out and face the new. OK, the 12-12-18 wasn't perfect but it could have protected us from what I reckon will now be ratcheted up pressure for The Rangers to be accellerated into the top tier and boost income the old way. After all, according to St Mirren & County, we don't want change.

We might just have seen the biggest cutting off your nose to spite your face that Scottish football has seen in years, but at least we know exactly where the blame lies. 

 

Find this a pretty disappointing point of view from someone meant to represent us as fans.

 

Also, paragraphs are your friend 

 

Sorry if you found this a disappointing viewpoint, probably inevitable as there seem to be pretty polarised views on this. If you wanted change (and a lot of people did) then it was frustrating to see St Mirren and County block it. If you didn't want change, and the anti-change group have been better at putting their views forward, it's been a good day. Only time will tell.

[Rasczak]

From my post No.65: The split just now is only for 5 games which is ~13% of the season. The proposed split is for 14 games which is ~39% of that season. The two splits are completely incomparable. How can you prevent teams from having a shot a European qualification after only 3/5ths of the season? Absolute madness. Also the split in the SPL is pre-defined you don't know who it will be exactly but you know it will contain 6 SPL clubs in each section meaning by virtue of being an SPL club you will play SPL teams for the whole season. This proposed idea meant that you could start the season in the SPL have any chance of a late push removed and to then finish your SPL season playing against SFL1 clubs every second week.

 

And under the current system it is impossible for teams to have no chance of Europe after 3/5th of the season ?

 

The 11-1 system used to protect things in the new structure means change is effectively prevented look at how well this voting structure has prevented change in the SPL all these years. The only concession made was to change the 9-3 regarding the structure of the league only and not the other 11-1 protected items in the package.

The reports I have seen don't confirm either way if it was all protected measures or just the league structure.

Even if it was just the league structure, then by offering the 9-3 more compromise has been given.

 

I don't see anything in it for the teams that are giving up money. Credit to them for attempting to do so but I am yet to see a benefit for them. The new structure has 1 less home game for them than the current SPL. The money is redistributed down the leagues as well. So income is lowered on both fronts there for the top clubs. There is the potential for an increased chance of relegation so again the SPL clubs near the bottom could lose out and again lose money. This new system is not going to significantly increase gates or commercial income to cover these losses.

The kudos you mention is one thing, they look good in the eyes of others and that in itself could bring in increased gates from away fans. "They helped us get a fairer share of the cash, I'll go to away games there". Fanciful I know but not impossible. And they could also be looking long term, giving up a little now, getting more overall income back into the game so they end up with more, remember 1% of something is better than 100% of nothing.

 

Comparing to a 16 team league is irrelevant as it will never be implemented.

Not with the current set up of 2 clubs being able to block anything for the other 40. But going to 12-12-18 with all the other things it would have brought may well have given us the stepping stone needed to get a set up in place that would have given us that.

Of course if 12-12-18 had gone through, got Scottish football on a stable setting, given the excitement and competition we need, improved our UEFA and FIFA rankings, then been changed to a 16 team top division as that was the next step forward, there would still be those who say it would be a failure as it had to change.

It may not be perfect, I have never said it was, but it seems to me to be right for right now. Something else may be better for another time.

[Kingsmills]

 

 

So that's it then, no change in a game that seeks a new major sponsor this year and has to look again at tv rights soon. No change in a game that at least we can all agree is dying by degree in this country. Dying because we couldn't try something new by simply altering with a points resetting a split in the league that we already have anyway and we could have altered after three years. No change in the cash distribution (how many more clubs after Dunfermline will we be saying goodbye to?) No pyramid that allows genuine progress on merit. No change to a derided 11:1 voting system. Why? because of the utter self interest of the two chairmen of two clubs who thought that they might be at risk of ending up in that split group and couldn't see the bigger picture.

It's a shame that the picture has been clouded by the single issue of a bigger SPL. It simply isn't sustainable because the fans that have shouted loudest are those of clubs who are at the greatest risk of losing out on SPL status. They're not coming through the turnstiles in greater numbers, they're not investing in their clubs and they're not offering credible alternatives even after the clubs did their bidding last summer. They are just sitting in the back of the cave, afraid to come out and face the new. OK, the 12-12-18 wasn't perfect but it could have protected us from what I reckon will now be ratcheted up pressure for The Rangers to be accellerated into the top tier and boost income the old way. After all, according to St Mirren & County, we don't want change.

We might just have seen the biggest cutting off your nose to spite your face that Scottish football has seen in years, but at least we know exactly where the blame lies. 

 

Find this a pretty disappointing point of view from someone meant to represent us as fans.

 

Also, paragraphs are your friend 

 

Sorry if you found this a disappointing viewpoint, probably inevitable as there seem to be pretty polarised views on this. If you wanted change (and a lot of people did) then it was frustrating to see St Mirren and County block it. If you didn't want change, and the anti-change group have been better at putting their views forward, it's been a good day. Only time will tell.

 

 

With respect Davie, I don't think there is a single poster who doesn't want change. There are, however, a fair number of us who don't believe that the package proposed today was the way forward.

[PaderbornCaley]

 

Very disappointed that this wasn't voted through.  Financially, it would have been a better package.  At first reading I thought the structure was crazy but once I got my head around it I really liked the concept.  It would have been much more exciting than the current structure. 

 

I'm reading on various social media such as Twitter that ICT fans are complaining that the club didn't consult them.  I live in Glasgow now but I was well aware of the open meeting with CJT that was advertised on here, the official website, and elsewhere.  I couldn't attend but read all the documentation from the meeting.  Happy that Kenny voted yes but it's a shame it wasn't enough for others. 

 

How?

 

More money is would be redistributed from the SPL to the SFL so ICT would see a reduction in money through this avenue. 12-12-18 results in 36 games for the top 24 teams so that equals 1 less home game per season than now so again less money for the club.

 

Sponsors are not gone to be queueing up to invest money in this product any more than they would now as it is still the same clubs just a different league system. So I don't see how it can possibly be financially a better package for us. Glad it has not gone through.

 

 

 

I was going to paste in the financial re-distribution graph to answer but I see Don has already done that! 

[GaliantGrunt]

Its money money money what about good entertaining football, lets get teams playing on the park never mind in the treasurers office !!!

[cal234ey]

 

 

Very disappointed that this wasn't voted through.  Financially, it would have been a better package.  At first reading I thought the structure was crazy but once I got my head around it I really liked the concept.  It would have been much more exciting than the current structure. 

 

I'm reading on various social media such as Twitter that ICT fans are complaining that the club didn't consult them.  I live in Glasgow now but I was well aware of the open meeting with CJT that was advertised on here, the official website, and elsewhere.  I couldn't attend but read all the documentation from the meeting.  Happy that Kenny voted yes but it's a shame it wasn't enough for others. 

 

How?

 

More money is would be redistributed from the SPL to the SFL so ICT would see a reduction in money through this avenue. 12-12-18 results in 36 games for the top 24 teams so that equals 1 less home game per season than now so again less money for the club.

 

Sponsors are not gone to be queueing up to invest money in this product any more than they would now as it is still the same clubs just a different league system. So I don't see how it can possibly be financially a better package for us. Glad it has not gone through.

 

 

 

I was going to paste in the financial re-distribution graph to answer but I see Don has already done that! 

 

 

And that graph shows that the red line (the proposed financial model) is lower than the blue line (current financial model) for the majority of SPL clubs. Therefore they would earn less money than currently through commercial monies distribution.

 

I maybe wasn't clear enough with my point sorry. How is this financially a better package for  the SPL clubs namely ourselves rather than Scottish football as a whole?

Edited April 15, 2013 by cal234ey

[cal234ey]

 

From my post No.65: The split just now is only for 5 games which is ~13% of the season. The proposed split is for 14 games which is ~39% of that season. The two splits are completely incomparable. How can you prevent teams from having a shot a European qualification after only 3/5ths of the season? Absolute madness. Also the split in the SPL is pre-defined you don't know who it will be exactly but you know it will contain 6 SPL clubs in each section meaning by virtue of being an SPL club you will play SPL teams for the whole season. This proposed idea meant that you could start the season in the SPL have any chance of a late push removed and to then finish your SPL season playing against SFL1 clubs every second week.

 

And under the current system it is impossible for teams to have no chance of Europe after 3/5th of the season ?

 

The 11-1 system used to protect things in the new structure means change is effectively prevented look at how well this voting structure has prevented change in the SPL all these years. The only concession made was to change the 9-3 regarding the structure of the league only and not the other 11-1 protected items in the package.

The reports I have seen don't confirm either way if it was all protected measures or just the league structure.

Even if it was just the league structure, then by offering the 9-3 more compromise has been given.

 

I don't see anything in it for the teams that are giving up money. Credit to them for attempting to do so but I am yet to see a benefit for them. The new structure has 1 less home game for them than the current SPL. The money is redistributed down the leagues as well. So income is lowered on both fronts there for the top clubs. There is the potential for an increased chance of relegation so again the SPL clubs near the bottom could lose out and again lose money. This new system is not going to significantly increase gates or commercial income to cover these losses.

The kudos you mention is one thing, they look good in the eyes of others and that in itself could bring in increased gates from away fans. "They helped us get a fairer share of the cash, I'll go to away games there". Fanciful I know but not impossible. And they could also be looking long term, giving up a little now, getting more overall income back into the game so they end up with more, remember 1% of something is better than 100% of nothing.

 

Comparing to a 16 team league is irrelevant as it will never be implemented.

Not with the current set up of 2 clubs being able to block anything for the other 40. But going to 12-12-18 with all the other things it would have brought may well have given us the stepping stone needed to get a set up in place that would have given us that.

Of course if 12-12-18 had gone through, got Scottish football on a stable setting, given the excitement and competition we need, improved our UEFA and FIFA rankings, then been changed to a 16 team top division as that was the next step forward, there would still be those who say it would be a failure as it had to change.

It may not be perfect, I have never said it was, but it seems to me to be right for right now. Something else may be better for another time.

 

 

Some clubs may not be close to Europe after 3/5ths of a season but look at Ross County after 22 games they would have ended up in the middle 8 but now they have a chance to qualify for Europe why stop clubs having this opportunity.

 

Not enough compromise there are too many other poor factors.

 

Your point about away fans thinking they may go to away games of a club that helped them is possible but I don't think it alone would cover the losses I mentioned.

 

I don't think a 16 team league will happen as there would be too few home games for clubs for it to be voted through but that is a debate for another time.

[Charles Bannerman]

12-12-18..... 12-10-10-10....14-14-14..... it's actually largely irrelevant. What has been under discussion today is nothing more than a rearrangement of the deckchairs on the Titanic. It's the basic product that's fundamentally dysfunctional as a result of two clubs, artificially enhanced in size because they are the focal point of west central Scotland's religious and Irish political divide, sucking in such a large percentage of the game's resources.

People are getting terribly excited about the £1.3 million that would be handed down to the First Division. Better than a slap in the chops, but wait a minute... £1.3 million is LESS THAN 3% of Celtic's annual turnover of £52 million! It's also roughly the prize money for finishing 7th in the SPL.

So compared with the kind of cash the Old Firm deal in... and that is the problem... £1.3 million, divided among 10 clubs, is little more than farting into a hurricane. It's less than ICT's drop off in turnover the season they were relegated.

Quite simply, in the current era of football economics, wage expectations, broadcast deals etc etc, I believe that there is NO model where a population of 5 million can sustain a viable number of full time clubs alongside two which are turning over what the Old Firm suck out of the system.

There simply isn't enough cash left for the other clubs when so many football fans and their money disappear from Scotland's towns and cities to Ibrox and Celtic Park.

So I'm afraid I just have to return to my original suggestion that there is NO viable solution to this problem.

Edited April 15, 2013 by Charles Bannerman

[PaderbornCaley]

 

And that graph shows that the red line (the proposed financial model) is lower than the blue line (current financial model) for the majority of SPL clubs. Therefore they would earn less money than currently through commercial monies distribution.

 

I maybe wasn't clear enough with my point sorry. How is this financially a better package for  the SPL clubs namely ourselves rather than Scottish football as a whole?

 

 

 

I understand what you're saying about the re-distribution.  But look at the overall picture.

 

 

Under the new proposed financial restructure there would have been a significant decrease in the prize money for the top 2 in the SPL.  Ok, there's a chance we may end up 2nd this season (fingers crossed) but for years fans have complained that the top 2 teams get far too much money compared to the rest.  3rd - 8th would get slightly less than what they would get now.  Slightly less.  9th-12th would get around the same as they currently get.  Teams 13-24 would have got significantly more than what they already get.  

 

So the disproportionate amount of money that the top 2 teams currently get would have been shared with the rest, significantly helping the teams lower down and at the very worst, a slight decrease for teams 3rd-8th. 

 

What this would have meant for ICT and what appealed to me is if we were to get relegated within the next few years we would have the financial safety net of extra money in the pot taken mainly from the current disproportionate amount in the top 2. 

 

So, overall more teams will get stronger with the level playing field and more fairer financial distribution.  ICT would benefit knowing that that financial safety net is there if we were to have a disastrous season.

[cal234ey]

 

 

And that graph shows that the red line (the proposed financial model) is lower than the blue line (current financial model) for the majority of SPL clubs. Therefore they would earn less money than currently through commercial monies distribution.

 

I maybe wasn't clear enough with my point sorry. How is this financially a better package for  the SPL clubs namely ourselves rather than Scottish football as a whole?

 

 

 

I understand what you're saying about the re-distribution.  But look at the overall picture.

 

 

Under the new proposed financial restructure there would have been a significant decrease in the prize money for the top 2 in the SPL.  Ok, there's a chance we may end up 2nd this season (fingers crossed) but for years fans have complained that the top 2 teams get far too much money compared to the rest.  3rd - 8th would get slightly less than what they would get now.  Slightly less.  9th-12th would get around the same as they currently get.  Teams 13-24 would have got significantly more than what they already get.  

 

So the disproportionate amount of money that the top 2 teams currently get would have been shared with the rest, significantly helping the teams lower down and at the very worst, a slight decrease for teams 3rd-8th. 

 

What this would have meant for ICT and what appealed to me is if we were to get relegated within the next few years we would have the financial safety net of extra money in the pot taken mainly from the current disproportionate amount in the top 2. 

 

So, overall more teams will get stronger with the level playing field and more fairer financial distribution.  ICT would benefit knowing that that financial safety net is there if we were to have a disastrous season.

 

 

I get that and don't get me wrong I am completely for financial redistribution such as that suggested. But we lose a little prize money and 1 home gate so I think the club would end up with a lower income through this distribution. Despite this, financial redistribution should voted in on its own and we can hopefully get some movement on the good parts of the proposals soon.

[ammac]

12-12-18..... 12-10-10-10....14-14-14..... it's actually largely irrelevant. What has been under discussion today is nothing more than a rearrangement of the deckchairs on the Titanic. It's the basic product that's fundamentally dysfunctional as a result of two clubs, artificially enhanced in size because they are the focal point of west central Scotland's religious and Irish political divide, sucking in such a large percentage of the game's resources.

People are getting terribly excited about the £1.3 million that would be handed down to the First Division. Better than a slap in the chops, but wait a minute... £1.3 million is LESS THAN 3% of Celtic's annual turnover of £52 million! It's also roughly the prize money for finishing 7th in the SPL.

So compared with the kind of cash the Old Firm deal in... and that is the problem... £1.3 million, divided among 10 clubs, is little more than farting into a hurricane. It's less than ICT's drop off in turnover the season they were relegated.

Quite simply, in the current era of football economics, wage expectations, broadcast deals etc etc, I believe that there is NO model where a population of 5 million can sustain a viable number of full time clubs alongside two which are turning over what the Old Firm suck out of the system.

There simply isn't enough cash left for the other clubs when so many football fans and their money disappear from Scotland's towns and cities to Ibrox and Celtic Park.

So I'm afraid I just have to return to my original suggestion that there is NO viable solution to this problem.

With that attitude the board might as well just put up a "For Sale" sign at the stadium. Every league in world is normally dominated by a couple of teams. Today was about getting the right structure to manage Scottish football going forward. Maybe the proposal are flawed but what harm is trying it?

[gingerjaggy]

i think even though the money may go down there is talk that sponsors and tv were willing to put more money in meaning in this structure so far with the money we get then all clubs in the spl will drop but if there is this cash injection then everyone would increase on the current financial distribution but i dont know if this cash injection was true and as it is it wasnt passed so it doesnt matter. But i said this the other day i think the stakes for the full time clubs in the first division is to high for this to have failed so expect that the status quo may not be the way forward i think SPL 2 could finally be considered

[FoolPhysio]

And that graph shows that the red line (the proposed financial model) is lower than the blue line (current financial model) for the majority of SPL clubs. Therefore they would earn less money than currently through commercial monies distribution.

 

I maybe wasn't clear enough with my point sorry. How is this financially a better package for  the SPL clubs namely ourselves rather than Scottish football as a whole?

You are basing this on the premise that the whole point is to win prize money, and that is all the teams are playing for.

Perhaps the idea was to stimulate the game through better competition and hence bring in more crowds, thereby encouraging the clubs by increased revenue and helping to attract individual sponsorship.

Or maybe we are resigned to the fact that it is easier to watch it on ESPN or Sky Sports than to actually go safe in the knowledge that the club can get a cut of my £42.50 per month?

[cal234ey]

 

And that graph shows that the red line (the proposed financial model) is lower than the blue line (current financial model) for the majority of SPL clubs. Therefore they would earn less money than currently through commercial monies distribution.

 

I maybe wasn't clear enough with my point sorry. How is this financially a better package for  the SPL clubs namely ourselves rather than Scottish football as a whole?

You are basing this on the premise that the whole point is to win prize money, and that is all the teams are playing for.

Perhaps the idea was to stimulate the game through better competition and hence bring in more crowds, thereby encouraging the clubs by increased revenue and helping to attract individual sponsorship.

Or maybe we are resigned to the fact that it is easier to watch it on ESPN or Sky Sports than to actually go safe in the knowledge that the club can get a cut of my £42.50 per month?

 

 

No I am not basing it solely on prize money. What I am saying is I don't believe that reconstructing to this 12-12-18 would bring about any more competition or revenue than now.

Speak for yourself with that last line.

[Charles Bannerman]

 

  Teams 13-24 would have got significantly more than what they already get.  

 

 

So, overall more teams will get stronger with the level playing field and more fairer financial distribution. 

 

What teams 13-24 will get is pennies in the context of trying to run a full time football club. It's window dressing!

 

"Level playingfield"? Yerjokeenmun! In a situation where Celtic are annually turning over of the order of SIXTEEN TIMES as much, for instance, as ICT and even Rangers in the Third Division will be several times as much as well, you're trying to say that the reallocation of £1.3 million creates a level playingfield???

Also, somebody tried to suggest that all leagues have a couple of teams bigger than the others.  I'd struggle to find one where two are so massively bigger and in the face of a small population base. Or can anyone else tell me where I can find a league based in a population of 5 million where there are two clubs drawing crowds of the order of approaching 50,000 while several other teams in the same league are averaging around 4000, and with corresponding disproportion from other commercial activities? I am genuinely open to being educated on this one.

[The Mantis]

Sadly, ol' CB (central belter!) is right, and he should know as he's even older than me!

The only possible way out is for all the non- OF clubs in Scotland to grow a pair, resign en masse from the SPL and SFL, and form a new structure while leaving the twins of evil to play each other 38 times a year if they like.

Of course, that scenario (I mean the part about growing a pair) is about as likely as Deek Adams dressing up as Santa at the next ICT Xmas party.

[FoolPhysio]

Speak for yourself with that last line.

Frayed knot mucker - refuse to have Sky, too busy to waste money on TV I won't watch.