[It's all about the fonts]

Give us Georgia, godsdammit!

[Pyramid 2019/2020]

12 minutes ago, mcruic said:

Saying that attendances increase due to promotion is not an assumption - it's a fact.  Saying that the attendances are higher because the teams are playing nationally, on the other hand, is an assumption on your part.  Can you be sure that it's not just because they are playing in Tiers 3 and 4 instead of 5 or 6?

My point about the National League in England was not meant to be a direct comparison, but an example of how regionalisation can be a good thing.  In the end, England has actually gone more regionalised below the National League North and South, with 4 leagues instead of 3.  England can afford to be national in the top 5 Tiers though, as Tier 5 in England has higher attendances than Tier 3 in Scotland.

 

Average English 'tier 5' attendance for 2018-19 was just under 2000.

[New clubs in the East of Scotland]

9 hours ago, FairWeatherFan said:

As important as forming tiers 7-8 is long term. It shouldn't take away from the importance of how promotion/relegation will between the EoS Premier and below next year.

With a 16 team league and possibly having to take into account knock on effects of the HL/LL playoff. I doubt they'd relegated more than 3 clubs from the Premier.

If enough clubs come along for 3 conferences. It maybe wouldn't translate into exciting promotion campaigns. And doesn't seem to acceptable to regionalise in those circumstances.

If Premier gains an LL club without promoting one back, let it play with 17 club membership for the following season, adding one extra relegation place for that following season. Regular relegation ought to be bottom three + fourth-bottom to participate in a play-out versus three First Division teams. In First Division, three champions promoted + three sets of playoffs between 2nd. to 5th.-placed sides, the three winners of which then join Premier-13th. in that play-out.

If any First Division teams in top-5 cannot for any reason accept a promotion, then qualification in their division would simply drop by one place. If more than one club cannot accept promotion, then after the above, the playoff 'zone' would be reduced accordingly, never taking lower than 6th.-place finishers. In the first instance, the topmost playoff qualifier would receive a bye in the first playoff round.

Were a First Division to entirely fail to produce a champion, it would be unable also to provide a playoff challenger. In this case, direct relegation would be reduced by one and the reprieved 14th.-placed team would instead join the 13th.-placed team in the play-outs. If that First Division instead promotes a champion, but has no playoff candidate, then Premier-13th. team will receive a bye in the first play-out round.

For any further 'inabilities to promote, priority will then be given to reprieves, dropping play-out places down the Premier table and sorting playoff qualifiers on a PPG basis.

NB* - 'Champion' in above references implies 'highest placed First Division team which is able to accept promotion'!

 

[The East Kilbride FC Thread]

Going back to the mid to late '70s in (as Zimbabwe was then known) Rhodesia, there was a team called, 'Glens Strikers' who competed in the Rhodesia National Football League (Northern Section) Division 5 in the '76 season. That year they won 34 straight League matches, most by a margin of 10-20 goals and a couple exceeding 20. They were jump-promoted to Division 2 for the '77 season and repeated another 100% win record over 38 more League games, most victories now in the 6 to 12 goal margin.
In the '78 season, again jump-promoted two levels, they finally met with some matching resistance in their new (Northern Section) Premier Division League surroundings and now, entry into the RNFA Cup. In this season they still won all but four of 38 League matches, drawing the others and then went on to win playoffs for the right to enter the RNFL's flagship National Division. They were defeated just the once in the Cup, having been drawn against strong National Division opponents. In the '79 season, they were a poor to middling outfit in the National Division and after that, I lost track of footie in that country.

That was an admirable playing record most certainly, but to be honest even that cannot be guaranteed being 'THE' Zimbabwean record, as runs such as these are reasonably common in African organised lower divisional football, and must also be so in equivalent echelons worldwide! For reference purposes, ignoring top-level professional African teams, most football there is strictly of Scottish amateurs-equivalent status.

 

[How to progress 'The Pyramid']

Bottom line ... you are wasting your time. We`ve been through all this with all the `authorities`, leagues, clubs, governments and their agencies, etc. SFA have NEVER organised football in this country ... it has all been sticky-plastered together, ad hoc. Ergo, we have 1.5% of clubs in voting membership and 99.4% (children, communities, players) denied access to a national league ... and the duff government support this catastrophe, which can only continue to get worse, because almost every other country is making much better efforts.

What you have written might actually `progress` the rotten SFA `pyramid` ... but NOT the Scottish game.

Scotland is exceptionally short of quality players and reasonable competition... which you don`t get without proper training and organisation ... which needs financed. Few clubs in SPFL, or any structure you would add, are capable of modest production or competition. We have to create capable clubs ... not by weak licencing, but by strong LEGISLATION... nothing with fewer than 1000 paying members, bringing us down to around 500 in Scotland .. and capable of reaching the top two levels. Portugal, where I spend a lot of time, are usually in all senior and age-group finals, with 122 clubs in the top three levels, compared to 32 in Scotland ... so nothing you have suggested would compete with that, or other strong countries, where most clubs are `community` type, owned by the members and well-structured.

The only force that can deliver this is government ... by getting rid of SFA, SPFL and all other rotten structures. Congratulations to anyone on the forum who got that right ..

I was reminded recently that Scotland gave the current game to the world (acknowledged by FIFA) and that football here pre-dates SFA, SPFL, FIFA and UEFA, as well as Scottish governments. WHO THE HELL gave them the right to stop our kids playing .. ?

Egg first/chicken first?

Absolutely damn right that the football itself also has to be dragged up by the bootstraps. However, if there's not a reasonably attractive local playing system in place, then it'll not matter how many UEFA A/B licensed coaches and club organisations, etc. you've got - it'll simply fail to attract/keep the actual players that are required.

Remember too that Government 'interference' in football is severely sanctioned by FIFA ~ to the point of exclusion from competitions, so be realistic about what exact intervention you mean with that.

Forget the Portuguese system, Scotland's closest European comparison nowadays is Iceland, who like the other Norse/Baltic nations before them, have made giant strides in progress in the last 30 years.

So. Whatever league pyramid happens, or not... how would you practically, step-by-step see to those improvements you're advocating, assuming carte blanche?

[How to progress 'The Pyramid']

The evidence for this is what? I doubt the full-time clubs ever give this issue much thought and they probably have the biggest say on this within the SPFL. Since the emergence of the fifth tier and the merged SPFL, the mechanism of the pro/rel playoff is now agreed upon between the SFA and the SPFL executive board, which is dominated by the top two tiers. The SFL may have opposed three-way regionalisation when the smaller part-time clubs held the majority of the votes in the context of an SFL AGM. In an SPFL context it's not clear that they hold anything like the same voting clout on this issue.

I suspect the bigger issue would be the attitude of the nonleague seniors to losing the phoney barrier between junior and senior clubs and the financial subsidies that go with it. They form a large voting block at SFA AGMs, so licensing has been implemented in a way that first and foremost accomodates the existing full-members through the provision of grants for ground improvements, and when junior clubs did start to apply the progression clause was soon added to try to scare any gate crashers away.

I agree your first point. It may no longer be as clear cut, however there's a helluva lot of inertia against 'League' teams having to drop out of 'national competition' if relegated... and I recall much ado five or more years past about this, basically becoming one of the founding precepts for forming a semi-national division akin the HFL to accommodate those relegatees for whom the HFL would not be 'a fit'. I'm afraid I'm unable to quote chapter and verse, sorry.

Your second point may well be valid, but it's palpably not the only 'scuttling measure' in town; naming no names. I strongly suspect that despite these spiking-guns attempts, the SFA will eventually prove to have almost all such parties/cliques over a proverbial barrel before too long. I do not think the SFA is prepared to be long thwarted in their organisational plans.

I have no illusions that progress will be made at any rapid pace, surely it will be a long drawn out attrition. I DO think that if not very careful, the SJFAs might well achieve the Pyrrhic victory of retaining their own largely unaltered structures - but doing so will see these slowly slipping down the reorganised levels of the game, not because there'll be any tacit punishment for failure to engage, no. Rather, the available players of particular levels of skill, until recently happy to ply their trade in the Juniors, will now find more opportunities to do so within the slowly expanding ranks of the evolving Senior Pyramid. If Junior clubs don't begin to fill the LFL (Premier Division, we'll call it.), then it'll be the BSC Glasgow & Edusports Academy clones plus Cumbernauld Colts & East Kilbride wannabes who will begin filling the inevitable LFL West & LFL East feeder divisions... taking away yet more players from the not infinite pool that the Juniors depend upon!

It's simply all about better mousetraps in the end. Mark me, writing has been writ deep upon the wall.

Remember: I'm apologist for neither side, Junior or Senior. This is just my predictive opinion on how I perceive the situation to be actively evolving. True, my OP model IS an 'utopianist' dream, hoping for a 'best possible compromise' between all parties - it's also attempting to be reasonably realistic, too.

I've tried to put as much careful thought and willingness to compromise into the idea as I can - but I DO hear and respect others opinions upon mistakes/improvements... and will always try to respond creatively to solve any found.

[How to progress 'The Pyramid']

Until someone realises that you cannot just split Scotland in two for regionalisation purposes,the model will never be right.

Oh, I agree. Problem is that in real-life the SPFL only countenance a two-way split extremely reservedly, while any three or more-way split is summarily dismissed.

While my model is 'fantasy', it does attempt to address not just the geographic reality, but also the rather inert, intransigent attitude of the SPFL too. It's a compromise solution. A shedload of compromises, in fact.

The SPFL keeps its four sets of championship contests v. non-league top divisions shuffled-up to Level 4.

SPFL sacrifices national play at Level 3 v. wholesale promotion of 8 clubs to national Level 2.

SPFL agrees 3 or 4 relegations to non-league v. bottom of Level 3 'buffered' by influx of 24 non-league clubs.

Juniors guaranteed top-division non-league placement, retaining all three traditional Regions.

Junior promotees to SPFL insulated from national play upon promotion.

Non-league promotion still optional, extended to invite perhaps as far down as 3rd./4th.-place if champions/runners-up defer.

Final (4th.) SPFL relegation place by playoff (if required), following Level 3 17th. v. 17th. play-out.

Those are the basics, based upon the current realities taken to logical conclusions, steered just so, with as little disruption as possible.

Of course, some Junior clubs could be accommodated at a higher entry level in the envisaged process, but the illustration IS; as mentioned; just showing the idealised, least disruption scenario, and more, is over-simplified to show the system as it would have looked were it for this 2015-16 season, and introduced in one fell swoop instead of partially over three seasons as is actually intended.

To the commenter querying Ayr United's position: The illustration is based on end-2014-15 positions.

[How to progress 'The Pyramid']

Issues: At the bottom end where you've split into 3,the North is unbelievably weak in terms of standard.

Issue: Simply taking the top 11 from the LL creates a division where the sub structure teams are stronger than the majority of the teams in the league above them.

I guess what I'm saying is that it is ok in principle but flawed because it doesn't get the best teams at the right level simply by starting from where we are. As such I'm not sure how supported it would be. On the flip side, any attempt to stick Talbot in where Gala are would be be resisted strongly by all who worked to get the LL up and running.

Oh, indeed. However, it's now an incontrovertible fact that the LFL will hereon be senior to the whole Junior organisation, and; much like the English Northern League who failed to engage & integrate with the Pyramid when they were equal in status to the Northern Premier League; the Juniors will become systemically further & further sidelined the longer they take, dropping Levels in the Pyramid as years pass.

It would likely have been very different, with probably 8-10 Juniors initially elected into the LFL alongside a half dozen of the best EoSL/SoSL teams by now, had they just made the necessary 'leap of faith' ~ which is not such an unattractive supposition. However, it didn't happen, so the situation is as visualised above. Comme si, comme ca!

And as regards the North... yep, that's definitely so to begin with, but after 5-10 seasons the gap would close. It took the English Alliance League (later Conference, now National League) several seasons before the prior season's FL relegatee failed to win immediate promotion. It would be very similar here.

[How to progress 'The Pyramid']

I'm writing as an interested non-SFA/SJFA-aligned observer from outside Scotland.

NB - This opens with a lot of SPFL discussion, but bear with it, as it reaches non-league issues as it progresses...

I can clearly see that 'The Pyramid' in Scotland; while utterly needed and created in a well-meaning way; has been bumbled together with a major lack of insight. It doesn't need to stay that way.

That which has been put together so far is not a bad place to start from, to begin creating a 'proper' Pyramid that everyone can appreciate and enjoy.

That process will in its course also address some perceived gripes with the current set-up and hopefully solve them.

Firstly. The SPFL point-blank refuses to engage with relegation from its bottom tier, unless its relegatees are guaranteed at very least semi-national competition, meaning there should be no more than two feeder 'zones'.

This clashes with the traditionally historic and holistic three-way separation of the country's non-league footballing 'zones'.

Secondly, in the SPFL itself there are only 42 teams and these are split vertically into four distinct national tiers, which whilst a working paradigm, leaves much to be desired in terms of limiting opportunity for lower tier clubs to reach the higher tiers (too many promotions required). [ii] geographic footprint size in the lowest tier(s). [iii] boring fixture repetition in the inevitable double round robin match schedule.

This is countered by there being a doubling in the number of championships to be won (compared to a more 'normal' two-tier divisional split for 42 teams) and a concomitant increase in relegation places - both factors creating more interest.

However, the central argument for 'delivering fewer meaningless games' that spawned this four tier development remains deeply suspect, as in fact it is & has been statistically far more usual for these smaller divisions to continue to present 'normal' deviations from the mean (in points-scoring) than the 'bunching' of points-scoring that had been (erroneously) expected by the four tier proponents. All in all, compounded with that double round robin, it meant teams would on average just become separated by greater points differences than before - thus nullifying the expected beneficial effect.

Almost all of these 'problems' could be wiped out by the expedient of absorbing (maybe as many as) 24 of the top non-league clubs into the SPFL system over a number of seasons.

For illustrative purposes I'll deal with three seasons, with eight inductees per season.

Season 0: SPFL structure:- 12-10-10-10

Season 1: SPFL structure:- 12-18-10N/10S

Season 2: SPFL structure:- 12-18-14N/14S

Season 3: SPFL structure:- 12-18-18N/18S

Note that SPFL sponsorship(s) should increase on the basis that the publicity reach has so expanded! There should be no question of dilution here, with on-the-ball SPFL negotiators.

Also, SPFL having now been boosted to 66 clubs, the lowest 36 already playing semi-national football, the relegation transition to a three-region non-league should be acceptable.

Admittedly, this would take away the HFL & LFL in their present forms, but the former could readily reform itself with intakes from the SJFA North region & NCL. There'd be no need to reform the LFL, as its rump members, alongside the EoSL/SoSL would integrate into the SJFL East/West regions.

This ought accord well with the SJFL, bringing them to the pinnacle of the non-league game in East & West regions, and in all but name in the North region, plus they would all then occupy the new fourth tier (from fifth/sixth), with the further advantage of semi-national play should their champions choose to step up to the third tier SPFL divisions.

Of course, that chestnut of 'where an ex-SJFL relegatee should drop to in the SJFL system' would immediately be solved - as they could not be dealt with differently to the traditional SPFL clubs!

Also, as in lower reaches of the English Pyramid, there would be enshrined a 'right to refuse' promotion, with a proviso that a 2nd./3rd. or maybe even 4th.-placed club could be invited to go up - and that would be direct promotion, not subject to play-offs methinks.

This would usually provide three promotees, so perhaps there could be an SPFL play-out between its two third tier 17th.-placed clubs, loser drops out. Perhaps even winner to play-offs vs. three 2nd.-invitees from the three SJFA top divisions? I could see that work!

I cannot see any (obvious) flaws in this idea, but I'm happy to be proved wrong, discuss at length and try to overcome objections. Likewise, clarify if I've confused on any issue.

What would this all look like in practice? Based on end of last season...

SPFL Premier I've assumed would remain unchanged.

SPFL Championship

Airdrieonians
Albion Rovers
Alloa Athletic
Brechin City
Cowdenbeath
Dumbarton
Dunfermline Athletic
Falkirk
Forfar Athletic
Greenock Morton
Hibernian
Livingston
Peterhead
Queen of the South
Raith
Rangers
St. Mirren
Stranraer

SPFL Division 1 North

Arbroath
Brora Rangers
Buckie Thistle
Clachnacuddin
Cove Rangers
Deveronvale
East Fife
Elgin City
Formartine United
Forres Mechanics
Fraserburgh
Inverurie Loco Works
Montrose
Nairn County
Stirling Albion
Turriff United
University of Stirling

Wick Academy

SPFL Division 1 South

Annan Athletic
Ayr United
Berwick Rangers
BSC Glasgow
Clyde
Dalbeattie Star
East Kilbride
East Stirlingshire
Edinburgh City
Edinburgh University
Gala Fairydean Rovers
Gretna 2008
Queen's Park
Selkirk
Spartans
Stenhousemuir
Vale of Leithen
Whitehill Welfare

HFL/SJFA North Premier

Banks o' Dee
Culter
Deveronside
Dyce Juniors
FC Stoneywood
Fort William
Golspie Sutherland
Halkirk United
Hermes
Huntly
Inverness City
Keith
Lossiemouth
Maud Juniors
Rothes
Strathspey Thistle

SJFA/SoSL West Premier

Arthurlie
Auchinleck Talbot
Beith Juniors
Glenafton Athletic
Hurlford United
Irvine Meadow XI
Kilbirnie Ladeside
Kirkintilloch Rob Roy
Lochar Thistle
Newton Stewart
Petershill
Pollok
Shettleston
St Cuthbert Wanderers
Troon
Wigtown & Bladnoch

SJFA/EoSL East Premier

Bo'ness United
Bonnyrigg Rose Athletic
Broxburn Athletic
Cumbernauld Colts
Easthouses Lily Miners Welfare
Fauldhouse United
Hill of Beath Hawthorn
Kelty Hearts
Leith Athletic
Linlithgow Rose
Lothian Thistle Hutchison Vale
Newtongrange Star
Penicuik Athletic
Preston Athletic
Sauchie Juniors
Threave Rovers

Not exactly how it'd look if, as I stated above, its development were staged over three seasons, but the illustration's enough to let you get the right general impression. It could, of course be developed more slowly - say, over six seasons, inducting four teams per season. As long as divisional memberships were kept at 10 (36 match season); 14 (39 match season) or 18 (34 match season) throughout it would work just fine. Even an odd 12 (33 match season) would remain acceptable in the build-up process.