Scottish Football Reconstruction

[TheLip69]

also - "Wur game's deid" is a tired, hysteria-driven soundbyte.

Actually it's more of a cliche that's been around the game since Logie Baird was a laddie.

I would suggest it's a cliche whose relevance is more apt today than it's ever been.

[Burnie_man]

The Swiss don;t have too many good things to say about 8x8x8 either is seems;

http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/scotland/21313900

http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/scotland/21313899

[TheLip69]

Hibee-JIbee, I see your friends the Swiss are claiming the same system, 2x12 going into 3x8, was to blame for them falling down the rankings, hence the reason they got rid. Switzerland have climbed the rankings since going onto 2x10 and have qualified for the last two World Cups. Amazing eh!

[HibeeJibee]

I've got concerns about 12-12 > 8-8-8 too. But 10 isn't going to fly... so, what, is the whole reorganisation just dropped? It doesn't seem SPL's going to give away cash, ease criteria, and reunite, without getting something in return.

And in a worst-case-scenario, if 12-12 > 8-8-8 really does prove a disaster, then it could just become 2 levels of 12 splitting 6-6, as currently?

I agree with everything the 2 articles with the Swiss say about the preferability of small divisions over large ones.

[Nowhereman]

I would argue that the last time Motherwell played in an 18 team league their average crowd would have been higher than what they get today. Considering that we used to get twice as many OF fans then than we do now.

These days we rarely get anymore than 9000, those days it used to be around 20-23,000. With Airdrie in the league at the time as well I am pretty sure we had better crowds then than today.

The last time you played in an 18 team league was 1974/75. Here's a comparison of the crowds back then with this season. The seventies crowd is first

Kilmarnock 3,600 - 4,903

Aberdeen 3,472 - 5,093

Hearts 5,142 - 4,147

Dundee United 3,516 - 3,941

Hibs 7,452 - 5,301

St, Johnstone 4,646 - 3,649

Total 27,828 - 27,034

Sorry to let the facts get in the way of a good story

[SpoonTon]

Lets not forget that the current Swiss model is what the SPL wanted in the first place. And it actually works even better if, like the Swiss, you only have one big club per population centre (2 in Zurich being the exception). That would involve creating a smaller number of 'elite' clubs. And creating a franchise system would be even better in this respect.

I don't think questions of what Scottish football fans are looking for are answered in the Swiss comparison.

[The Old Northerner]

My first criteria is making leagues as interesting and exciting as possible... big leagues do that worse. I favour smaller (but not too small such as 8/10) divisions for that reason and recognising £££. Finance is important - vital, infact - but it's not the only reason.

Similarly why I favour 4x playing, and splits in 12/14/etc.

Also - "Wur game's deid" is a tired, hysteria-driven soundbyte.

I'd argue it isn't the size of the league that enhances/dilutes excitement but rather the discrepancies between the clubs with the league. One romping away with the title and one detached without hope won't be more of a cliff hanger in a 12 team division than a 20 team one. All the splits and play-offs that can be envisaged really don't do anything to change the competitiveness of any individual club.

All the alternative systems proposed on here have one thing in common which will be to their detriment - acknowledged or no. All of them adhere to the idea that round-robin home/away fixtures are the 'correct' way to schedule whatever flavour of league/sub-league/split clubs find themselves in. There is one 'obvious' way to organise this; however, it has been rejected. Although the reasons for the rejection are pragmatic, there is, IMO, no doubt that all parties recognise that any new structure is (and has to be) a departure from the ideal.

Altering a competition so that clubs *appear* more competitive is pretty much a exercise in sleight-of-hand which doesn't address (if it can be addressed) the real underlying problem - that the top 20 or so clubs in Scotland (especially with the OF) don't fit neatly on a gradual scale of 'massive' to 'diddyish'. They fit into discrete groups with substantial differences between them.

[Monkey Tennis]

Altering a competition so that clubs *appear* more competitive is pretty much a exercise in sleight-of-hand which doesn't address (if it can be addressed) the real underlying problem - that the top 20 or so clubs in Scotland (especially with the OF) don't fit neatly on a gradual scale of 'massive' to 'diddyish'. They fit into discrete groups with substantial differences between them.

I disagree. Take out the OF and I think you have precisely the gradual scale you're after.

There's a massive drop in size and stature between our second biggest club and our third one. I think you could then slide all the way from the third biggest, down to pub/Sunday league level, along a very gentle gradient.

[The Old Northerner]

I disagree. Take out the OF and I think you have precisely the gradual scale you're after.

There's a massive drop in size and stature between our second biggest club and our third one. I think you could then slide all the way from the third biggest, down to pub/Sunday league level, along a very gentle gradient.

Yet, one of the calls against a bigger top league is, to be blunt, that you would be adding unattractive dross and automatically creating a mid-table of meaninglessness. That doesn't square well with the idea of a regular gradual decline (it also might not square with discrete groups, to be fair. Each club might be regarded as a group apart)

[Monkey Tennis]

Yet, one of the calls against a bigger top league is, to be blunt, that you would be adding unattractive dross and automatically creating a mid-table of meaninglessness. That doesn't square well with the idea of a regular gradual decline (it also might not square with discrete groups, to be fair. Each club might be regarded as a group apart)

Yes, but that's because we're a small country with two huge clubs. It means that you might run out of decent sized clubs as you reach numbers 16-20. It doesn't however mean that you'll find a particularly sheer drop anywhere, because you won't.

[Burnie_man]

The last time you played in an 18 team league was 1974/75. Here's a comparison of the crowds back then with this season. The seventies crowd is first

Kilmarnock 3,600 - 4,903

Aberdeen 3,472 - 5,093

Hearts 5,142 - 4,147

Dundee United 3,516 - 3,941

Hibs 7,452 - 5,301

St, Johnstone 4,646 - 3,649

Total 27,828 - 27,034

Sorry to let the facts get in the way of a good story

St.Johnstone v Aberdeen this season, 2,000, last season, 1,600. No need to wind the clock back 30 years to find where repetitive fixtures kill crowds.

[Burnie_man]

Yes, but that's because we're a small country with two huge clubs. It means that you might run out of decent sized clubs as you reach numbers 16-20. It doesn't however mean that you'll find a particularly sheer drop anywhere, because you won't.

There are probably 20/22 clubs in Scotland who could average 4,000+ if they played in a top division, more than enough for a 2 x 16/18 set-up

[EdTheDuck]

There are probably 20/22 clubs in Scotland who could average 4,000+ if they played in a top division, more than enough for a 2 x 16/18 set-up

[TheLip69]

The last time you played in an 18 team league was 1974/75. Here's a comparison of the crowds back then with this season. The seventies crowd is first

Kilmarnock 3,600 - 4,903

Aberdeen 3,472 - 5,093

Hearts 5,142 - 4,147

Dundee United 3,516 - 3,941

Hibs 7,452 - 5,301

St, Johnstone 4,646 - 3,649

Total 27,828 - 27,034

Sorry to let the facts get in the way of a good story

Do you actually know what average means?

All you have done is compared crowds with six clubs from then and in 3 of them we were up and three we were down, but overall we were getting more fans through the gate then than we are now.

Is there a point to this, because I cant see one?

I specifically mentioned I thought it would be higher because the OF brought twice as many fans then as they do now, but you ignored that as well.

WEhy dont you just iognore everything from now on because you are just making an arse of yourself.

[TheLip69]

I've got concerns about 12-12 > 8-8-8 too. But 10 isn't going to fly... so, what, is the whole reorganisation just dropped? It doesn't seem SPL's going to give away cash, ease criteria, and reunite, without getting something in return.

And in a worst-case-scenario, if 12-12 > 8-8-8 really does prove a disaster, then it could just become 2 levels of 12 splitting 6-6, as currently?

I agree with everything the 2 articles with the Swiss say about the preferability of small divisions over large ones.

I am not a fan of smaller leagues I have said that before, but I would be perfectly happy with two smaller leagues. as long as they were SPL 1 and 2 with the money being evenly distributed and, a TV deal for both leagues and a proper promotion relegation deal.

I dont like splits but 2x12 with the current split is far preferable to the 3x8.

The SPL needs to be bigger, whether that is adding more clubs to the one division or adding another division I dont particularly care, but the current proposal is a complete nonsense. The three 8s is just farcical, and the more you disect it the more it just looks like the SPL blocking promotion.

[Burnie_man]

Your contributions so far really are enlightening.

[Burnie_man]

The last time you played in an 18 team league was 1974/75. Here's a comparison of the crowds back then with this season. The seventies crowd is first

Kilmarnock 3,600 - 4,903

Aberdeen 3,472 - 5,093

Hearts 5,142 - 4,147

Dundee United 3,516 - 3,941

Hibs 7,452 - 5,301

St, Johnstone 4,646 - 3,649

Total 27,828 - 27,034

Sorry to let the facts get in the way of a good story

.....and to pick up on this, from 74/75 season, the averages for those clubs who currently reside outwith the SPL and who could potentially enter an enlarged top division;

Partick Thistle 6,136

Ayr United 5,800

Dunfermline 4,822

Airdrieonians 4,401

Stats eh? they can prove anything.......

[Burnie_man]

I am not a fan of smaller leagues I have said that before, but I would be perfectly happy with two smaller leagues. as long as they were SPL 1 and 2 with the money being evenly distributed and, a TV deal for both leagues and a proper promotion relegation deal.

I dont like splits but 2x12 with the current split is far preferable to the 3x8.

The SPL needs to be bigger, whether that is adding more clubs to the one division or adding another division I dont particularly care, but the current proposal is a complete nonsense. The three 8s is just farcical, and the more you disect it the more it just looks like the SPL blocking promotion.

Like you, I prefer larger leagues and think its the way forward to develop our game long term, however, I could swallow remaining where we are just now in the short term IF we have at least two down automatically from the SPL with maybe a play off for third bottom, that would certainly increase interest in the dead bottom 6 and wouldn't involve major unpopular change.

If that were to happen, why can we not continue with the other reforms such as merged league bodies, better cash distribution and all the other reforms? a big part of it is to do with the very real possibility that no SPL clubs get relegated under this mad 8x8x8 play-off, and that these reforms are just a very big juicy carrots that will be chucked in the bin if the SPL dont get their way.

[The Old Northerner]

Yes, but that's because we're a small country with two huge clubs. It means that you might run out of decent sized clubs as you reach numbers 16-20. It doesn't however mean that you'll find a particularly sheer drop anywhere, because you won't.

I can't see that the existence of the OF has much to do with the 'decent size' running out point.

[Monkey Tennis]

I can't see that the existence of the OF has much to do with the 'decent size' running out point.

Can't you - seriously?

We're a relatively football mad nation.

However, the vast majority of people from throughout the country who follow football, identify chiefly with the OF. This means the clubs from the towns many come from are smaller than they might otherwise be. We therefore run out of decent sized ones more quickly. I can't believe I just needed to explain that.