Clyde01
-
Posts
2,602 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Events
Store
Posts posted by Clyde01
-
-
It’s funny how teams are happy to end the league early and relegate the bottom team even if they had a chance of avoiding the drop, BUT when all of a sudden they might be affected it’s toys out the prom and shouts of “it’s no fair “
Stranraer’s 2 league wins all season would suggest you were unlikely to string 5 or 6 together in the last 8 games.
Clyde on the other hand were closer to the promotion playoffs than the bottom so we’re not really comparing like for like.
For what it’s worth I favour 14-10-10-10 next season which would see Stranraer stay in league 1.1 -
The follow up proposal for the status quo (after temporary 14-10-10-10) is a direct contradiction to what you say you actually want, ie bigger leagues.
I didn’t say keep the status quo after a temporary 14-10-10-10 though did I?
I said go 14-10-10-10 next season to get us out of the current predicament and come up with a model that works best without our thinking being clouded by self interest.
The structure needs to come first then clubs play a season for their position in that structure. Instead we’re trying to enforce a structure based on the current standings, which is always going to be unfair on someone.0 -
Nothing really changing for Clyde,stil 2 promotions from the premiership.
FFS, maybe try reading the last few posts before chipping in with this shite.0 -
Genuine questions for Clyde fans.
All else aside do you like the set up of leagues of 10 that means playing teams 4 times?
What would be your ideal league set up?
What do most fans want?
Bigger leagues, more variety, not playing teams 4 (plus) times a season.
It’s well documented why the premier league can’t/won’t expand but that doesn’t apply to lower leagues.
Could easily have any of these models next season:
14-16-14
14-18-12
14-20-10
Or we could go 14-10-10-10 temporarily next season which doesn’t disadvantage anyone and actually put some thought into the best option longer term, without having it led by self interest.
Basing it on current standings is always going to be tricky. Why not come up with a suitable model and give teams a season to play for position in the hierarchy.
0 -
I agree with their main point.
But what League 1 sides are being sent down? They’ll still be in League 1!!
If we rename League 1 the champions league will you be looking forward to playing Barcelona?2 -
Genuine question for Clyde fans here. If we'd proposed going 14-14-14 for 2020/21 at the start of the 2019/20 season, would you have supported that?
So if you knew you'd get into the Championship with a top 6 finish?
That’s a totally different scenario though as every club has plenty of notice of what’s at stake and what they are playing for. You can’t just end a season and change the goal posts relegating mid-table sides.
As has been stated many, many times why is 14-14-14 so attractive a model? We still play teams too many times, either 3 which is mega-shite or 4 (as now) in a split.0 -
If 3x 14's is the preferred option it has to be with at least a years notice so teams actually know what they're playing for.
And besides, 14 teams leagues are pish anyway. They don't really solve the issue of playing teams too many times and either create awkward splits or uneven home/away fixtures. It's a truly horrid solution.
Spot on!0 -
I fully get this and don't want any team to suffer. But there has to be compromise somewhere.
Clyde would stay in L1. Not relegated down. L2 would get disbanded and unfortunately Kelty or Brora would be the only clubs to suffer possibly.
14/14/14 would be a decent option. Clyde would be in with a great chance of winning L1 in the first year to be honest. Then in the Championship.
No relegation for anyone and more promotions than expected.
That's my half full glass version.
When you end up playing all of the teams in the league below and none of the better sides in your current division that’s a relegation no matter how you try to dress it up.
I would hope we would be challenging for the title in a bottom 14 but with cove chucking money about and Peterhead always a thorn in our side it’s far from a shoe in.
We’ve spent the last 9 years playing the Elgin’s and Annan’s of the world over and over again. To end up back there through no fault of our own would be beyond shite.
Yes longer term we would have a better chance of establishing ourselves at tier 2 but it’s a big gamble that we shouldn’t be having to make.
2 -
It’s why I said similar rather than identical.
The similarity is both you and Smith believe the deadwood in Scottish football needs to be discarded and you’ve a pretty clear view who that means.
The difference is that, in Smith’s worldview, that includes Clyde.
Personally, I don’t think any of us are are in a position to make that judgement and that there is a severe lack of humility here.
The main difference being instead of being bought over and the club identity completely destroyed I’m in favour of relegation (a situation that can be recovered from if these clubs are actually fit to compete at league two level).
So in other words not very similar to Smith at all.
0 -
It wasn't, you're right, but which part of my post involves maths?
The bit where you suggested 9 years was more than a decade. [emoji23]0 -
Albion Rovers were playing in a higher league than Clyde only two seasons ago.
Of the past 25 seasons Albion rovers have spent 20 of them in the bottom tier. Just because one of their brief sojourns out of it coincided with us being at our lowest ebb doesn’t prove anything.0 -
I'm interested in what others opinions may be to the following question.
If tomorrow Clyde put season tickets up for sale for next season would you buy one?
I think I would.
We don’t know what league we will be playing in, what format it will take, how many home games we will have, when or if season will start. So probably not...0 -
If I have to spell it out for you, then ok.
It’s pretty easy to be dismissive of the impact of supporting the aspirations of ambitious clubs if your club isn’t one of the ones affected.
Similarly, Smith is cool with the idea of sacrificing the independence of provincial teams such as Clyde and Airdrie to enable teams with grander ambitions a chance to fulfill theirs.
I’ll leave it to Brechin and Albion Rovers fans to compare recent records with Clyde’s and assess whether there is any irony in a Clyde fan asserting that they are “perma-shite”.
I’m not talking about sacrificing anyone’s independence though, I completely disagree with that.
But I have no problem with ambitious clubs giving some of the bottom feeders a shake up. East Stirling’s relegation was long overdue. Berwick have shown they are miles off being competitive even at lowland league level. Albion rovers are another perennial struggler who won’t be long till they’re gone. You shouldn’t get countless reprieves, that’s not how a pyramid is supposed to work.
I don’t think it’s good for the game if all the clubs coming up are unsustainable basket cases like Gretna but some fresh blood is long overdue at lower league level.
As for your last point, our spell in league 2 was the first time in our history we had played at that level and I can assure you that throughout it the support was driven by getting out again. Unfortunately there were/are plenty teams down there without that ambition happy to coast along and get their SPFL cash. Chapman and the half Annan squad he brought with him soon found out there was a massive gulf in expectation between Clyde and other clubs in league two.1 -
Listen to billy big bollocked Clyde over here dishing out the perma-shite diddy patter. Your rapist loving rabble have quite literally been a laughing stock pissing around in the basement of Scottish football for over a decade, sit doon.
Maths clearly wasn’t your best subject.0 -
A similar sentiment to the one Alex Smith expressed when he suggested Celtic should be allowed to buy out “provincial” (a euphemism for “diddy”) club Clyde so their colt team could get a place in the senior league.
https://www.dailyrecord.co.uk/sport/football/football-news/rangers-celtic-should-buy-over-9258820
How is me saying ambitious clubs looking to progress being road blocked by perma-shite diddies anything like saying it’s ok to sell out and become a glorified colt team?0 -
14, 14, 14 is a dreadful idea.
P.S. The Championship and Leagues 1 and 2 are also the SPFL. The top division is not called the SPFL.
I am yet to see a decent argument in favour of 14-14-14. What does it actually achieve?
Either we have a terrible 39 game uneven season or we split and play some teams 4 times as now. So there isn’t significantly less repetition.
Of course league 2 are in favour as it allows them to try and shut the trapdoor for a season. Longer term it gives some smaller clubs a chance of getting into tier 2 as well but is that enough of a reason to rip up the current system.
As a Clyde fan you could argue that we would be more established in tier 2 longer term but getting chucked back into the bottom tier to facilitate this is a kick in the stones and not something we should be accepting.
I like the idea of only 3 leagues but I think at least one of those (not the premier obviously) should be a bigger league of 18-20 clubs only playing twice. That would at least be a significant step away from the status quo rather than change for the sake of it or to benefit a couple of sides.0 -
Kelty will probably last in the SPFL for a few years until the money dries up and will likely then yo-yo between the LL and the EoS
At which point Stranraer will probably be playing in the SoS League against their own reserves.1 -
It's fair to relegate Dumbarton who are 22 (twenty two) points above the automatic relegation spot.
Dumbarton would get to be in the championship despite still being very much in our sights with 8 games left
0 -
If you want to change the league structure without at least a full seasons notice then it shouldn’t harm anyone.
The 14-14-14 doesn’t meet that criteria so needs rethought, simple as that.3 -
No kelty and brora aren't being shafted. I don't know why we are trying so hard to shoehorn them in. Cove took 2 attempts to get in.
A better question would be why are we trying so hard to keep them out, whilst preserving dung like Brechin, Albion rovers etc
1 -
Why don’t we just run with a bigger championship, playing each other twice.
Could easily have 14-16-14 which would include highland and lowland winners. Would still be harsh on Forfar and cove though.
Or 14-18-12 then the only decision is stranraer or cove to play in tier 2. Cove seems the obvious choice but Stranraer can’t be the only team in the country to be relegated.
14-20-10 could work too where the second tier contains 8 current championship clubs, all of league one, plus cove & Edinburgh.
Bigger leagues is the best way to avoid playing each other so often. It’s been well documented why that won’t fly in the premiership but why not at tier 2?1 -
One of the main reasons to get rid of leagues of 14 was the unfair split in fixtures and now we are going back to it.
Couldn’t agree more, the fixture schedule proposed by league 2 is shite. If your going to have a league of 14 I’d much rather play twice then split rather than play an uneven 3 match rounds season.
3 -
Finding it hard to grasp the sporting integrity of not relegating teams in last place but quite happily jettisoning the bottom end of league one into the diddy league.
It’s not ok to relegate big clubs in relegation spots but it’s fine to relegate smaller clubs not in relegation spots?
And make no mistake, it’s a relegation on everything but paper.
It should be 14-10-10-10 next season and if they want to transition to 14-14-14 from there at least everyone has some notice of what’s at stake. Rather than finding out after the season has ended that mid-table actually means relegation.
Also the self preservation of league 2 clubs is predictable but embarrassing. Don’t let anyone up, protect us from relegation for 2 seasons. Get to f**k.8 -
Roberts is interesting as he has done nothing since. No club jobs, just two unsuccessful spells managing the national teams of Pakistan and Nepal. You'd imagine his stock would have been relatively high after a second place finish and victory over Celtic.
I think we finished 5th that season. Our form did collapse a bit after the Celtic win and subsequent humping off Gretna. Even still that team Roberts put together from nothing and that Celtic result were unbelievable.0
The SPFL recommendation?
in Scottish League 1 General Chatter
Posted
If 14-14-14 is the model that most clubs want then I’m sure Clyde wouldn’t have a major issue providing it is not imposed on current standings.
We should go 14-10-10-10 next season (I still maintain it is the least offensive way forward) as a transition to a permanent 14-14-14.
This could be achieved by no relegation in the championship in season 2020/21, promote the top 3 of league 1, teams 4-6 in league 1 playoff with league 2 winner for last spot in new tier 2, teams 7-10 in league 1 join league 2 clubs and playoff losers to form new tier 3.
The very bottom is where it gets tricky either we relegate 3 and promote 1 (that will set the arses twitching) or go 14-14-16 to maintain 44 clubs and only have 1 relegation spot at the bottom.
None of this really answers the question of why 14-14-14 is such a desirable model though, I’m still waiting on a good answer to that. We either play 3 times or split and play 4. One is shite, the other is little different to present.