SouthEnclosure Posted January 31, 2013 Share Posted January 31, 2013 Playing teams four times IS boring, then you get them in the league cup, Scottish cup, replays. zzzzzzzzzz Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mushroom Posted January 31, 2013 Share Posted January 31, 2013 meaningless games is not an issue to me as mentioned a pre season friendly is a meaningless game & im sure some of those posting will attend those however its not regional that's on the table, its the 2 bottom leagues as they with 2 new teams & with more money comming in IF the 18 comes in , id be less happy playing in that than with how bad Ayr have been this season why 18 anyway why not 20 It's the playing 4x a season and the lack of relegation from SFL 3 which makes certainly SFL3 awful, we weren't in SFL2 long enough to really get a feel for the thing, maybe theres enough movement (particularly since Ayr have been yo-yoing a bit) to make the 4x thing less of an issue, but I bet 2x a season would be more interesting, how often do we see cup draws and people only want a team from outwith their own league. I'm not sure how adding teams brings in more money but I would not be against a league of 20. Again, if the promotion/relegation is sensible. Not my point at all, the SPL couldn't give a flyingfuck how the SFL set up below the 12-12 Let's be honest though, why should they. They're not the ones who have to deal with the consequences. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
EdTheDuck Posted January 31, 2013 Share Posted January 31, 2013 I reckon the Big Clubs are still grinding their teeth at having to run to 12-12 when 10-10 would have been their perfect world (IMO). The 8-8-8 split is going to be temporary, it'll run for a specific period, maybe the 3 years Doncaster mentioned for sponsorship reasons, but it's definitely temporary and I wouldn't be surprised if there's some serious moustache twirling and diabolic laughing going on behind closed doors (and possibly a girl being tied to the tracks too)... If high stakes games and increasing the excitement was genuinely the purpose of this latest revamp then why isn't the Top 8 starting from half-points or 'mutual game' points rather than simply carrying on with all their points? Shunting all the focus for providing excitement onto our middle-ranked clubs is bollocks of the highest order, we need clubs at the top end of the table to have something tangible to play for as well if they're going attract a single extra fan through the gates - the 12/12-8/8/8 set-up as presented will not achieve that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HibeeJibee Posted January 31, 2013 Share Posted January 31, 2013 Tbf, even if 12-12 > 8-8-8 fails, they could go 14-10 (with 14 splitting 6- or 12-12 using current 6-6 splits. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guinessnspicyrum Posted January 31, 2013 Share Posted January 31, 2013 I think if we accept the idea of splits,and precedence says we do,3x14 with a pyramid structure underneath is what we'll have eventually.This splits 6/8 after 26 games.I think a lot of fans have come round to the 12-12-10-10 proposal with wealth redistribution in the hope that in 2/3 years that will allow the current SFL clubs to catch up a bit,thereby making a top 14 more competitive.My main concern as a supporter of a club more than likely to be regularly involved in the middle 8 is this.What happens to our points tally after 22 games? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cookies71 Posted January 31, 2013 Share Posted January 31, 2013 I say the merger thing works if we two clubs into the English leagues with English teams and the rest of us get on with it Scunt Celtic Arse Rangers Although very crudely put this statement is unfortunately true. While "The Rangers" and Celtic are still involved in Scottish football you will always have chairmen looking to ply them as many times as possible for the financial side of things. What these chairmen aren't factoring into their calculations is what happens when these two go down south (or Eurpoean league) taking the knuckle dragging masses with them? What then. League reconstruction should be based around what we will do when them two leave Scottish football as it will eventually happen. Cut the cloth now and treat games against them as a bonus rather than an essential expenditure needed to keep afloat!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gogs Grog Posted January 31, 2013 Share Posted January 31, 2013 I can accept the 'radical' change of 12-12-10-10 just to get one body governing the whole shebang and opening up the 3rd into some form of a pyramid system. Yes it can get static year on year particulary in the 3rd where only one club may change every year but the whole idea of an 18 lower league being better for me may not be as good as it sounds. I think there will be plenty of clubs who will get marooned in the 18 team league for ever and a day safe from the relegation but not good (or big) enough to get up. You'll end up with the same teams year in year out with the same clubs yo-yo'ing up and down. The only real interest will be the clubs coming into the national set up through the pyramid however that will be set up. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Monkey Tennis Posted January 31, 2013 Share Posted January 31, 2013 this proposal does seem to deliver * 1 governing body * smoothed-out financial distribution * much more promotion/relegation opportunity into SPL * pyramid * relaxed ground criteria * other details (e.g. ending 11-1 voting) which everyone wants. Yes. When listed like that, there really is a Hell of a lot to gain from this. These are concessions that would have seemed unthinkable just a short time ago. The proposals are imperfect, but they bring us much closer to perfection than anything we've endured in the last decade and a half. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sergeant Wilson Posted January 31, 2013 Share Posted January 31, 2013 Not my point at all, the SPL couldn't give a flyingfuck how the SFL set up below the 12-12 Exactly, if no-one said I doubt they'd have noticed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Magoo9uk Posted February 1, 2013 Share Posted February 1, 2013 Why,after all this time is this being rushed through and presented as a one time only deal ? If these people are in agreement now and all ready to do their bit for the greater good then surely that shouldn't evaporate within 6 months ? I think all fans should be very uncomfortable with any changing of the rules mid season.Where is the much vaunted Sporting Integrity ? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nod25 Posted February 1, 2013 Share Posted February 1, 2013 If their is a pyramid system implemented which level/league would be directly below the third division as it is? Any ideas? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
EdTheDuck Posted February 1, 2013 Share Posted February 1, 2013 If their is a pyramid system implemented which level/league would be directly below the third division as it is? Any ideas? There* The suggestion was for there to be Highland and Lowland feeder leagues of 10 teams each IIRC although I have no idea what the composition of these leagues would be Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nod25 Posted February 1, 2013 Share Posted February 1, 2013 If their is a pyramid system implemented which level/league would be directly below the third division as it is? Any ideas? There* The suggestion was for there to be Highland and Lowland feeder leagues of 10 teams each IIRC although I have no idea what the composition of these leagues would be . Haha. I put there in originally but changed it, should have gone with my gut feeling Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
relichtie Posted February 2, 2013 Share Posted February 2, 2013 If we are to have this new set up then 12-12-10-10 would be better. An 18 team bottom league would be filled with meaningless games. But imo if this is to try to entice lost supporters back to the game then its an epic fail. Rearranging the deckchairs on the Titanic springs to mind. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mushroom Posted February 2, 2013 Share Posted February 2, 2013 If we are to have this new set up then 12-12-10-10 would be better. An 18 team bottom league would be filled with meaningless games. But imo if this is to try to entice lost supporters back to the game then its an epic fail. Rearranging the deckchairs on the Titanic springs to mind. I'm giving up explaining this, I'm just going to link to the 24 team league two in England and ask whose games are meaningless? http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/league-two/table Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
EdTheDuck Posted February 2, 2013 Share Posted February 2, 2013 If we are to have this new set up then 12-12-10-10 would be better. An 18 team bottom league would be filled with meaningless games. But imo if this is to try to entice lost supporters back to the game then its an epic fail. Rearranging the deckchairs on the Titanic springs to mind. I think the Mid 8 might attract some extra fans especially as the sharp end of the 14 games approach, but it depends on how well the whole thing is promoted and how close the 8 teams are after a few games. The Top 8 and Low 8 won't attract any extra folks through the gate because they are offering absolutely nothing different to what is on offer right now and you could argue they're offering even less. It's a shame because it wouldn't have taken much to completely change the whole dynamics of the 14 game run in at the Top and Low 8... If the SFL go with 10-10 then what changes from where we're at right now? Maybe a little more interest at the arse end of Division 3 (or 4 or 5 or whatever the f**k it'll be) but teams in relegation trouble don't attract extra fans unless and until they have a winner-takes-all game and of course there's no guarantee those games will ever come along. I actually think the 18 team league might work at that level; the fall-off in quality isn't nearly so pronounced as it is as the top end of our game and the fact there would be 6 places to chase at the top of the table and 2 to avoid at the bottom of the kind of dodges the swathe of mid-table nothing games you might otherwise get. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Burnie_man Posted February 3, 2013 Share Posted February 3, 2013 I think the Mid 8 might attract some extra fans especially as the sharp end of the 14 games approach, but it depends on how well the whole thing is promoted and how close the 8 teams are after a few games. The Top 8 and Low 8 won't attract any extra folks through the gate because they are offering absolutely nothing different to what is on offer right now and you could argue they're offering even less. I would venture to suggest that crowds at the 4 clubs from the top division involved in this ludicrous "middle 8" will disappear like snaw aff a dyke. The whole plan is seriously flawed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
craigkillie Posted February 3, 2013 Share Posted February 3, 2013 Why would they? The clubs will be facing new opponents and fighting for their lives in a relegation battle. Both of those things are likely to improve crowds. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Burnie_man Posted February 3, 2013 Share Posted February 3, 2013 Why would they? The clubs will be facing new opponents and fighting for their lives in a relegation battle. Both of those things are likely to improve crowds. Hardly. Look at the table this season, Hearts would have been condemned to this "middle 8" despite only being 8 points off runners-up spot, so 14 meaningless games to finish the season, they wouldn't get a crowd over 10k. Relegation battles do not increase crowds unless it's a final do-or-die game. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheLip69 Posted February 3, 2013 Share Posted February 3, 2013 I think if we accept the idea of splits,and precedence says we do, Does it really, 12 years with splits as opposed to 110 without? Splits are artificial and are in there to keep the league artificially short, but stop the clubs from playing too many games. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.