Scottish Football Reconstruction

[Monkey Tennis]

The trick to increasing crowds long term is to increase the the hard core element who will turn up regardless of opposition/what the games means (I used to be one). I personally got sick of playing the same teams over and over again, I jacked it.

These fans are decreasing, they are decreasing now despite playing in a small league with a lot of so called "meaningful" games.

Until we move away from beating ourselves up over how to make every game "meaningful", then we'll never make any sort of long term progress whatsoever.

In much the same way as the trick to that alchemy lark is to turn base metals into pure gold.

You're identifying the repetitive fixtures as a major stumbling block to improved gates. I'd agree that it doesn't help, but I can't dismiss the importance of how meaningful a game is and it's a term I use unashamedly and without inverted commas, because it's perfectly clear what it means.

Anyway, I'm excited by the new proposals and I hope they happen. This is mainly due to the off-field changes that - like it or not - are tied in. I also think the sytem itself with its prospects of more movement, is well worth a spin.

[TheLip69]

I've picked this bit, not so much because it's unhelpful to your case, but because it's so useful fo mine.

It's the very fact that we have a small top league, that a fixture between those currently ranked 13 and 14 in the country got such a good crowd. By creating a division after 12, there's suddenly a huge prize at stake for those beneath it. If those sides were to meet in the lower mid-table of a big league, we both know that far fewer would show up.

You're example argues not only the case for a smaller top flight in the first place, but also makes the whole 8-8-8 idea, yet more attractive.

Thats because the prize at the end of it is a guaranteed place in the SPL, that will no longer exist with the new proposals.

[Burnie_man]

In much the same way as the trick to that alchemy lark is to turn base metals into pure gold.

You're identifying the repetitive fixtures as a major stumbling block to improved gates. I'd agree that it doesn't help, but I can't dismiss the importance of how meaningful a game is and it's a term I use unashamedly and without inverted commas, because it's perfectly clear what it means.

Repetitive fixtures is a major flaw that 8x8x8 does nothing to address, and is a factor in why we need meaningful change, not more of the same and not focusing all our efforts on addressing the red herring of "meaningless" games. Let's face it, "meaningless games" means "we need 4 OF games". That, ultimately, is what it all boils down to.

Anyway, I'm excited by the new proposals and I hope they happen. This is mainly due to the off-field changes that - like it or not - are tied in. I also think the sytem itself with its prospects of more movement, is well worth a spin.

You may be excited, you're in a small minority. The off-field changes are welcome and can happen regardless, and that is what clubs should be focusing on first before trying to push through a flawed system that the vast majority of fans do not want.

[TheLip69]

Meaningless games are a very real and legitimate worry.

As worries go though its up there with "Does this tie go with this shirt" incredibly its forced its way to prominence in some eyes to shore up a weak argument.

I would love a definition of what actually constitutes a meaningless game.

The one thing a smaller league does bring is that there is a better than average chance of a team being cut loose fairly early, the SPL has only rarely given us a relegation battle. Dundee are as good as down and its unlikely that either St Mirren or Hearts will make the European places, so do their games become meaningless?

[TheLip69]

I am one of those people who go to see my team, the opposition makes no difference to me.

While the opposition may make a difference to some, the hardcore support are there week in week out anyway.

There are a myriad of reasons that affect crowds now, playing a match in Inverness on a bitterly cold Tuesday night in February when there is a Champions League match involving two of the Worlds biggest teams isnt going to tempt too many off the couch is it?

Next season when we have SPL 1 and 2, will the TV deal extend to the second tier?

Frankly I am not just bored with the SPL I am bored with seeing the same dozen sides on the TV all the time. Of course why would anyone screen SPL2 when there isnt a great deal to play for, other than cash, and at the end of 22 games the only thing resolved is who will play in what 8. If the champions dont get promoted what use is being champion, other than cash?

Does that make all previous matches, in essence, meaningless?

Especially as the Top 4 lose any advantage their points gave them. In the bottom 8 if they keep their points, isnt it likely that after 22 games we will have at least one team already tailed off wont that make their games meaningless? If it happens that there are two teams aleready tailed off at the bottom, wont that make the whole bottom 8 meaningless with everyone just going through the motions until the end of the season?

[TheLip69]

Anyway, I'm excited by the new proposals and I hope they happen. This is mainly due to the off-field changes that - like it or not - are tied in. I also think the sytem itself with its prospects of more movement, is well worth a spin.

Oh come on please, these off field changes can be borught in without the brouhaha of league changes like this poarticular horse ass.

Thre is just as much likelihood of fewer movements that there is more, so that particular pooint isnt valid.

[Monkey Tennis]

Thats because the prize at the end of it is a guaranteed place in the SPL, that will no longer exist with the new proposals.

But four top flight places will exist at this point of the season. Your argument that the chances of promotion are reduced for given teams under the new system is, frankly, bonkers.

[Monkey Tennis]

Repetitive fixtures is a major flaw that 8x8x8 does nothing to address, and is a factor in why we need meaningful change, not more of the same and not focusing all our efforts on addressing the red herring of "meaningless" games. Let's face it, "meaningless games" means "we need 4 OF games". That, ultimately, is what it all boils down to.

You may be excited, you're in a small minority. The off-field changes are welcome and can happen regardless, and that is what clubs should be focusing on first before trying to push through a flawed system that the vast majority of fans do not want.

There will be less repetition of fixtures for those sides which find themselves in the middle 8, so the matter is addressed to a degree.

Taking a minority view really doesn't trouble me, if I think it's the right one.

[Monkey Tennis]

Thre is just as much likelihood of fewer movements that there is more, so that particular pooint isnt valid.

There's not and your repeated insistence on saying there is, does not alter that fact.

[Mr D Culpepper]

Do you think your average fans even considers any of that?

What a fan wants is value for money, decent fitba, a few beers with their mates a bit of banter and a win/good result to celebrate. That is their day out and its their day out whether they play Rangers or Raith Rovers and regardless of what the game "means". These fans are normally termed "hard core".

The trick to increasing crowds long term is to increase the the hard core element who will turn up regardless of opposition/what the games means (I used to be one). I personally got sick of playing the same teams over and over again, I jacked it.

These fans are decreasing, they are decreasing now despite playing in a small league with a lot of so called "meaningful" games.

Until we move away from beating ourselves up over how to make every game "meaningful", then we'll never make any sort of long term progress whatsoever.

Well said! To a real fan, every game his or her team plays is meaningful. The problem is too many games that are the same, with your team playing every other team at least four times a year. We need more "meaningful" games against a much wider range of teams and the rest should take care of itself.

What fans find meaningful and what the media and businessmen think of as meaningful are entirely different things, and it is the fans that pay the money at the turnstiles.

[Monkey Tennis]

Well said! To a real fan, every game his or her team plays is meaningful.

Oh FFS.

Recognising that some games carry more significance than others is now sufficient to render someone not a 'real fan'?

Do grow up.

[HibeeJibee]

Well, even if he's right, it means an awful lot of fans aren't "real" fans.

[TheLip69]

 

There's not and your repeated insistence on saying there is, does not alter that fact.

 

Of course there is, there is just as much chance of none going up as there is of any of them going up.

Regardless of the merits of chance, the fact that the possibilty even exists should be enough to render the proposal void.

[TheLip69]

 

Oh FFS.

Recognising that some games carry more significance than others is now sufficient to render someone not a 'real fan'?

Do grow up.

 

Just because some games carry more significance than others doesnt make the others any less meaningful.

At least not to a real fan.

[EdTheDuck]

   

Just because some games carry more significance than others doesnt make the others any less meaningful.

At least not to a real fan.

Never mind the Real Fans, back in the Real World...

Morton -v- Partick a week ago in front of over 5,600 people

Same fixture just under a year ago in front of 1,600 people

This is a contemporary example of a game carrying more significance or if you prefer to flip it a comparatively meaningless game

Other examples,possibly too many to mention, are available

[TheLip69]

Never mind the Real Fans, back in the Real World...

Morton -v- Partick a week ago in front of over 5,600 people

Same fixture just under a year ago in front of 1,600 people

This is a contemporary example of a game carrying more significance or if you prefer to flip it a comparatively meaningless game

Other examples,possibly too many to mention, are available

Do you really think those 1600 fans a year ago thought the game was meaningless?

Thats what we mean by real fans, not the people who only turn up for the big games, those are the gloryhunters that want to say I was there, f**k them.

There are loads of them in Scottish Football, just like every OF fan who buys a season ticket to ensure they get to the OF matches and tickets for the Champions League.

Thats the reason Parkhead looks half empty for a league match, but they still say the stadium was full.

You can't wipe out so called meaningless games, they will always be there. Those so-called meaningless games used to come against the likes of Raith Rovers, Clyde, and Stirling Albion, now it's Hearts, Dundee, and St Mirren.

[HibeeJibee]

Do you really think those 1600 fans a year ago thought the game was meaningless?

Thats what we mean by real fans, not the people who only turn up for the big games, those are the gloryhunters that want to say I was there, f**k them.

There are loads of them in Scottish Football, just like every OF fan who buys a season ticket to ensure they get to the OF matches and tickets for the Champions League.

I'm slightly confused regarding your position on this now.

Surely by (rightly) agreeing there's lots of fans whose attendance is influenced by 'meaningfulness', it becomes a factor of key importance?

Such a fact emphasises why 'meaningless' games must be kept to a minimum, thereby making larger crowds than for 'meaningless' games.

If they are kept to a minimum, and thereby make larger crowds, that's more people attending football and more income. Both are positive.

Policy can't be "cater to the 1600, write-off the 4000".

[EdTheDuck]

Policy can't be "cater to the 1600, write-off the 4000".

That is precisely what the Real Fans (sic) want though, for everything to revolve around them; 18 team league might only see the hard core show up but that's OK because they're Real Fans and the Clubs should cut their cloth accordingly and if that means paying 16 year old duffers £80 a week the Real Fans will turn up anyway blah blah blah yadda yadda yadda

The thread has become surreal, completely ridiculous and irrational, an exercise in denialism and a testament to why the clubs treat fans like a bunch of halfwits...

[EdTheDuck]

Do you really think those 1600 fans a year ago thought the game was meaningless?

Thats what we mean by real fans, not the people who only turn up for the big games, those are the gloryhunters that want to say I was there, f**k them.

There are loads of them in Scottish Football, just like every OF fan who buys a season ticket to ensure they get to the OF matches and tickets for the Champions League.

Thats the reason Parkhead looks half empty for a league match, but they still say the stadium was full.

You can't wipe out so called meaningless games, they will always be there. Those so-called meaningless games used to come against the likes of Raith Rovers, Clyde, and Stirling Albion, now it's Hearts, Dundee, and St Mirren.

You haven't a clue what we're talking about when we speak about meaningless games, have you? You've crawled into a universe of your own making where games against the lesser lights have been deemed meaningless when in fact they are merely 'less attractive' - or is that only the case in the Real Universe as oppossed to the Real Fan Universe where every game is a heart pounding thrill ride?

Besides which you clearly missed the fact that I said

a comparatively meaningless game

As for your holier than thou Real Fan crap you can shove that where the sun don't shine, that has more in common with OF arrogance than any lapsed, occasional or Big Game Charlie fan ever had.

[SpoonTon]

The hardcore support isn't some immovable number. It grows over time and wanes over time. Part of the reconstructing must take into conisderation what will make the competition exciting, and meaningful, and encourage the number within that support to grow. Another part should be increasing the chances of big matches in which extra big crowds are likely.

Meaning is more than about individual matches. It's to do with a feeling that your club is achieveing something. That is very difficult in the current first division, and it can also be difficult in the SPL. As I've already said, the lack of competitive places has been awful for the first division - and in that the repetition becomes a real problem. It's not a huge problem for Morton to play Thistle 4 times in a season if the teams are rivals for an important position in the league, but it's very bland if there isn't much to play for. And the boredom-of-repitition gets worse as the meaningless seasons go on. The crowds between the two clubs has slipped lower and lower as the seasons without anything to achieve have gone on.

This has undoubtedly happened in the SPL. Clubs like Kilmarnock used to get big crowds for OF matches. Bug travelling supports + an opportunity to have a go at one of the OF equalled big crowds. But that's not the case anyone. The point of the fans that disike the repetition, and I would agree with them on this point, is that a match such as Killie v Celtic would attract a much bigger crowd because that fixture only occuring once a season would enhance the novelty factor. The same goes for any team, in terms of home and away support.

If Kilmarnock and Hibs, for example, were challenging for the SPL title, then an extra home and away game wouldn't be such a big deal (because it would be meaningful for the feeling of achivement and purpose that drives many fans). But otherwise it's a big turn off.

A split isn't a bad idea IMO. Because playing a competitor 4 times a season is fine. But playing someone pretty much for the sake of it 4 times feels repetitve and boring (a distinction between good repetition and bad repitition is important at this point). Therefore the 12-12, 8-8-8 idea seems like a good one. A chance to play a variety of teams a couple of times, and only potential rivals for a meaningful position 4 times. And in the middle group there are only 3 teams that you'll play 4 times.

But there is a fundamental problem. If people don't know where the meaning is (i.e. what there is to be achieved) then people won't be interested. In the League Cup every game is meaningful. And whoever wins the League Cup sees it as a great prize (just ask Killie fans, or Hearts/Midden fans in a couple of weeks). But that doesn't make it a well attended competition. If it was then the reconstruction of the League Cup could be a major consideration in the restructuring of Scottish football. People don't seem to know how to feel about its general importance, especially before the semi-final stage. And there is a distinct possibility that the same thing could happen in the 8-8-8 system. If people don't know where the achievement is (and I don't think that there's any simple way of indicating this, or the League Cup would see much more interest), then it will flop. People might only care about the second stage, or think the second stage lacks real achievement - or feel a mixture of both. You can't simply put a system in place with loads of meaningful games and expect people to embrace this. It might not happen.

You might be as well to reconfigure the League cup and have 2 or 3 leagues of 16. Because the league structure might become the new League Cup. Or perhaps the alternative is to disband the League Cup and have a 44 game season in a league of 16 with a split. But it seems that any system has its downsides.

Or the answer might really be, and the people would not expect this. 4 leagues of 10 with 2 automatic rel/pro places and an addaitional pro/rel play-off place. The stability of the smaller league and the solution of meaning to the problem of bad repetition. But then again, the people would hate this, and revolt...but they probably wouldn't.

BTW, the real answer is 10-16-16. But only if SPL clubs can accept the fun of relegation. Only 6 SPL clubs guarenteed safety at the end of the season gives the competition an inherent sense of meaning. And fighting for promotion in the marathon league of 16 brings the finance of extra games and the meaning of fighting for a place in the elite league.