MrWorldwideJr

There seems to be a group of people like you who are under the impression that because we are in the middle of a pandemic we shouldn't be allowed to think or talk about anything else. As if talking about trivial things means we don't get that this is a serious. That isn't what talking about sport means at all. Nobody is under any illusions that this situation is serious or that restrictions are going to last for a long time. Sport is a distraction from the shit parts of life, for many people a very important distraction, a way to have fun for a few hours a week. That doesn't change just because the shit thing that its distracting us from has gotten worse. Of course I'm worried about my health and the health of my family. Of course I'm concerned about whether my job will still exist in six months time. Does that mean that I've stopped caring about football? Of course not. When this is all over I'm still going to be interested in who is in the Premiership, who won the league this year, what the format is going to be. So what's the problem with spending some time talking and reading about it now? Its possible to care about multiple things at the same time.

This post just proves my point. None of the things you are saying are actual arguments, its just buzzwords. Explain to me why the current structure is unproductive. Explain why regionalising instead would be more productive. Explain why your change is required in order for more emphasis to be placed on facilities, coaching and development. Explain why regionalising earlier will improve the football league structure, what will be better for supporters of, say, Stirling Albion if they are playing regionally instead of nationally? Explain why it would be more attractive to sponsors. You don't do any of this, you just say it would be so as it is obvious, but it isn't. As for 'bringing up the national team argument again' - you are the one who has pushed this as the main thrust of your argument for pages and pages. If you want to change your tune now then fair enough but don't act as if its weird that people are refuting something that until recently was the main point of your argument.

Its not at all no. I haven't seen you make a single argument more complex than 'Croatia/Belgium/whoever else regionalise at tier 3 and got to the world cup final so we need to regionalise at tier 3 too'. That isn't evidence based. Its forcing a correlation where you have absolutely no evidence that the two are linked because you want it to be true. Come back with actual evidence that regionalising early in any way correlates to a more succesful national team, to more youth players from the lower tiers ending up in the national team. Come back with some sort of explanation of where all the money you think clubs will save by playing in a regional set up is coming from and demonstrate that it won't just be cancelled out by lower sponsorship/prize money/gates. Until then your argument remains an irrational failure to understand that correlation doesn't equal causation and that you don't actually have any real evidence from other countries that proves the same thing would work in Scotland.

And your solution to this is appointing the famously innovative and forward thinking Gordon Strachan?

I think this might be your issue tbh. Not one person on this thread is treating him as the 'messiah' or anything close to that. Pretty much every regular poster on this thread this season has had regular criticisms and complaints about him. The only 'over the score' comments here have been yours ramping up how much you think he has failed every time you post, you started off quite reasonable but trying to downplay winning trophies and regularly finishing second is a bit silly. People calling you out on this doesn't equal being part of the 'McInnes can do no wrong' brigade.

Out of interest, who do you want to replace him? There are some managers doing such a disastrous job (McLeish with Scotland for example) that you just need to sack them and then worry about who their replacement is afterwards. Its pretty obvious that McInnes is not an example of this and if we're going to get rid it should be with a clear plan of who we are going to replace him with, someone who will be a clear improvement. Who do you think we could realistically attract to the role who would fit the bill?

What's their average wage though?