HibeeJibee Posted August 12, 2015 Share Posted August 12, 2015 there is no chance of that happening even if rangers ever get back into european tournaments Facts don't bear that out... about 29pts will get you into 15th, i.e. an average of about 5.75pts per season. We managed to land 4pts last season in a fairly unremarkable campaign, plus if Celtic could: (1) win & draw against Malmo then get as little as 1 win/2 draws in CL groups and finish as low as last; or (2) draw & lose against Malmo, then pick-up around about 2 wins & 4 draws over the full remainder of EL; then we'd increase it to 4.33pts this season. It's clearly not beyond all possibility for us to uplift these sort performances by as little as a third or a quarter to 5.xpts and do it for another 3yrs-4yrs. Challenging but not inconceivable. And setting 29pts as a target is only based on current levels. Over the last decade as little as 25pts has often been enough. In context we clocked 10.25pts in the 2007-08 season you cite, which is double what would be required if it could be done consistently over a period of 4-5yrs. Obviously the benefit of an over-performing season is it affords you the luxury of a poor season elsewhere. Unlikely for now as Celtic aren't convincing and we still suffer too many 'shockers' (Hibs-Malmo, Motherwell-Stjarnan, St Johnstone-Alashkert)... but in years ahead, e.g. with Hearts etc.? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Doonhamer doon south Posted August 13, 2015 Share Posted August 13, 2015 When you look at the nations above and just below us there only really Cyprus who doesn't fit in otherwise I would say the clubs from those nations are fairly equal on paper. I think scotland will rise and fall and I see summer football as an aide to European bound clubs as well clubs in the domestic campaigns. I think that scotland will go further than Bulgaria this campaign and I believe that Cyprus won't do great so they should drop below us next year. Need celtic to keep going as long as they can Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
54_and_counting Posted August 13, 2015 Share Posted August 13, 2015 Facts don't bear that out... about 29pts will get you into 15th, i.e. an average of about 5.75pts per season. We managed to land 4pts last season in a fairly unremarkable campaign, plus if Celtic could: (1) win & draw against Malmo then get as little as 1 win/2 draws in CL groups and finish as low as last; or (2) draw & lose against Malmo, then pick-up around about 2 wins & 4 draws over the full remainder of EL; then we'd increase it to 4.33pts this season. It's clearly not beyond all possibility for us to uplift these sort performances by as little as a third or a quarter to 5.xpts and do it for another 3yrs-4yrs. Challenging but not inconceivable. And setting 29pts as a target is only based on current levels. Over the last decade as little as 25pts has often been enough. In context we clocked 10.25pts in the 2007-08 season you cite, which is double what would be required if it could be done consistently over a period of 4-5yrs. Obviously the benefit of an over-performing season is it affords you the luxury of a poor season elsewhere. Unlikely for now as Celtic aren't convincing and we still suffer too many 'shockers' (Hibs-Malmo, Motherwell-Stjarnan, St Johnstone-Alashkert)... but in years ahead, e.g. with Hearts etc.? it clearly seems beyond possibility given scotland has been declining for years now including when rangers and celtic were in europe you say if celtic do this and celtic do that we can get to 4.33 pts this season, aside from the fact thats still a good bit away from what we need, what if the countries ahead of us perform the same or slightly better fact is we need more teams getting some decent points, preferably for more games as well, i know the set up of european competitions doesnt help countries like ours one bit, but some of the results are inexcusable, and i include quite a lot of rangers results previous to 2012 in that as well Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tarapoa Posted August 13, 2015 Author Share Posted August 13, 2015 This. Diabolical yet again. Is it though? St Johnstone probably yes - but they've actually done us a turn in the previous couple of seasons. Inverness edged out by the side who beat West Ham in the next round, and Lyon last season. Aberdeen survived a scratchy first round against a Macedonian side, who were half decent (see Rabotnicki beating Trabzonspor for validation that fitba there is ok) - great result against the seeded Rijeka, and then a disappointment in a close tie against a Kairat Almaty side on five-times our budget (and who'd beaten Red Star Belgrade home and away). Simple fact is everything is getting more and more stacked against us. Groningen, who we beat last year, are straight into the EL Group Stages for winning the Dutch Cup. They can accumulate loads of ranking points even if they don't get through the group. We finish second in our league, start in QR1, have probably four decent games out of six, but ultimately gain just a few crumbs in terms of our club and country ranking on the back of it. Diabolical seems a bit OTT though. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
craigkillie Posted August 14, 2015 Share Posted August 14, 2015 it clearly seems beyond possibility given scotland has been declining for years now including when rangers and celtic were in europe you say if celtic do this and celtic do that we can get to 4.33 pts this season, aside from the fact thats still a good bit away from what we need, what if the countries ahead of us perform the same or slightly better fact is we need more teams getting some decent points, preferably for more games as well, i know the set up of european competitions doesnt help countries like ours one bit, but some of the results are inexcusable, and i include quite a lot of rangers results previous to 2012 in that as well We haven't been declining over the last few years - here are the points earned per season since 2008/09. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
54_and_counting Posted August 14, 2015 Share Posted August 14, 2015 We haven't been declining over the last few years - here are the points earned per season since 2008/09. We've gradually slipped down the rankings though havent we? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
craigkillie Posted August 14, 2015 Share Posted August 14, 2015 Only because our original ranking was somewhat artificially inflated by a one-off season where Rangers reached the UEFA Cup final, Celtic reached the last 16 of the Champions League and Aberdeen reached the last 32 of the UEFA Cup. In a similar fashion, our rankings from the last couple of seasons were deflated by the woeful showings in 2008/09 and 2009/10 (and to some extent 2011/12). The first two of those have now dropped off, which has taken our overall ranking from 15.191 in 2013 to 17.900 in 2015. We have only climbed one place over those 2 years, but we have moved closer to the teams above us rather than looking over our shoulder to what's behind. We've averaged just under 4 points per season for the last three years despite one or two sides always bowing out early. Even that mediocre level of performance will probably be enough to take us up to somewhere like 20th-22nd. The climb to 17th doesn't seem like a huge jump from there - it just means squeezing out a few extra results each season, something which isn't that unlikely in the coming years if we start to see strong Aberdeen and Hearts sides participating regularly, and perhaps also Rangers a couple of years down the line. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
54_and_counting Posted August 14, 2015 Share Posted August 14, 2015 Only because our original ranking was somewhat artificially inflated by a one-off season where Rangers reached the UEFA Cup final, Celtic reached the last 16 of the Champions League and Aberdeen reached the last 32 of the UEFA Cup. In a similar fashion, our rankings from the last couple of seasons were deflated by the woeful showings in 2008/09 and 2009/10 (and to some extent 2011/12). The first two of those have now dropped off, which has taken our overall ranking from 15.191 in 2013 to 17.900 in 2015. We have only climbed one place over those 2 years, but we have moved closer to the teams above us rather than looking over our shoulder to what's behind. We've averaged just under 4 points per season for the last three years despite one or two sides always bowing out early. Even that mediocre level of performance will probably be enough to take us up to somewhere like 20th-22nd. The climb to 17th doesn't seem like a huge jump from there - it just means squeezing out a few extra results each season, something which isn't that unlikely in the coming years if we start to see strong Aberdeen and Hearts sides participating regularly, and perhaps also Rangers a couple of years down the line. I would agree with the last part if our clubs were putting up good showings against strong teams, but some of the defeats have been abysmal and i include mccoists 4 shambolic games before administration I suppose all it takes is one team going into a group stage along with celtic, need to see next season Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
La_Leyenda Posted August 14, 2015 Share Posted August 14, 2015 I think UEFA should replace the first three qualifying rounds of the EL with a group stage. That way everyone gets a guaranteed 6 games (like Aberdeen have had the last two years) giving the smaller clubs a chance to sell out a few games and also countries like Scotland a chance to pick up some coefficient points. Then, the group winners, plus the team's dropping down from the CL, could go into a two-legged play-off as what happens now, and the competition continues as it currently does. Would actually be a simplier system as at the moment draws are being made before a tie is finished, and teams are maybe getting a week's notice to sort a trip to the other end of Europe. Who knows, if Aberdeen's group had been us, Kairat, Rijeka and Shendija, we may have just sneaked into the play-offs. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Doonhamer doon south Posted August 14, 2015 Share Posted August 14, 2015 What size/how many groups would you go for and how would you arrange the teams into the groups. Would it be based on club coefficiant or where that nation sits in coefficiant table. Would this be for both competitions as well. I like this idea and think you could also regionalise it to an extent so clubs are not traveling the length of Europe. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BFTD Posted August 14, 2015 Share Posted August 14, 2015 On first glance, I like the look of this early group stage idea too. UEFA have no interest in maximising games involving wee teams, however, so that'll be that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HibeeJibee Posted August 14, 2015 Share Posted August 14, 2015 His idea would presumably be to replace the current QR1, QR2, & QR3 with a 6-game groupstage using the same dates (i.e. 6 consecutive Thursdays throughout July and early August); then the winners of these groups would go into what we currently call QR4 in mid August alongside CL QR3 drop-outs. You would have to rejig the numbers a bit as currently only 29 clubs advance from EL QR3 to QR4, and even excluding the Fair Play places which are being abolished from now there are 140 clubs which enter during QR1 to QR3 (and Gibraltar are still on a limited compliment). Such groups could only accommodate 116 clubs (29 x4) but you've got say 144 (36 x4) so you'd have to bring 7 clubs currently entering direct at EL groups forward into QR4. Obviously difficulty is you're almost doubling the number of games (from 228 to 432 - plus the 14 additional QR4 ties) with associated costs, travelling and so forth. Also with only the group winners progressing and the gulf in quality a lot of teams might be eliminated early or rack-up cricket scores. And you're asking everyone to start at QR1 time, currently some join QR2 / QR3. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tongue_tied_danny Posted August 15, 2015 Share Posted August 15, 2015 His idea would presumably be to replace the current QR1, QR2, & QR3 with a 6-game groupstage using the same dates (i.e. 6 consecutive Thursdays throughout July and early August); then the winners of these groups would go into what we currently call QR4 in mid August alongside CL QR3 drop-outs. You would have to rejig the numbers a bit as currently only 29 clubs advance from EL QR3 to QR4, and even excluding the Fair Play places which are being abolished from now there are 140 clubs which enter during QR1 to QR3 (and Gibraltar are still on a limited compliment). Such groups could only accommodate 116 clubs (29 x4) but you've got say 144 (36 x4) so you'd have to bring 7 clubs currently entering direct at EL groups forward into QR4. Obviously difficulty is you're almost doubling the number of games (from 228 to 432 - plus the 14 additional QR4 ties) with associated costs, travelling and so forth. Also with only the group winners progressing and the gulf in quality a lot of teams might be eliminated early or rack-up cricket scores. And you're asking everyone to start at QR1 time, currently some join QR2 / QR3. Only the group winners progressing could mean some really meaningless games in the last couple of rounds of fixtures. You could have a Welsh or Northern Irish team having to pay a fortune to travel to Almaty when it's impossible for both teams to progress. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
La_Leyenda Posted August 15, 2015 Share Posted August 15, 2015 Only the group winners progressing could mean some really meaningless games in the last couple of rounds of fixtures. You could have a Welsh or Northern Irish team having to pay a fortune to travel to Almaty when it's impossible for both teams to progress. Is it any different from a Welsh team losing 4-0 at home to Kairat then having to travel for the second leg? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
realmadrid Posted August 16, 2015 Share Posted August 16, 2015 Obviously difficulty is you're almost doubling the number of games (from 228 to 432 - plus the 14 additional QR4 ties) with associated costs, travelling and so forth. Also with only the group winners progressing and the gulf in quality a lot of teams might be eliminated early or rack-up cricket scores. And you're asking everyone to start at QR1 time, currently some join QR2 / QR3. The number of games would be the biggest obstacle to this happening as either the teams would get paid half the current fee to travel or UEFA would need to draw down money out of the group stage. Having just added in more direct qualification team to try and boost the profile of the competition I also cannot see UEFA cutting back the number of teams who qualify direct into the competition proper. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RedLichtie86 Posted August 25, 2015 Share Posted August 25, 2015 Well lets just hope Celtic can do better in the Europa League.l than they did tonight. Piss poor performance tonight. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HibeeJibee Posted August 25, 2015 Share Posted August 25, 2015 As covered earlier, if you think they can get 1 win & 2 draws more in EL groups than they would have in CL groups it makes no real difference. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Doonhamer doon south Posted August 25, 2015 Share Posted August 25, 2015 When is the draw for El Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
La_Leyenda Posted August 25, 2015 Share Posted August 25, 2015 When is the draw for El Friday. Obviously won't know who is all in it until Thursday night, but likely to be a real mix. They could get handed a group of death of Dortmund, fenerbahce and Southampton which they would struggle to get out of and wouldn't do our coefficient much good. Or, they could get tottenham, Lech Poznan and skenderbeu and you'd fancy their chances (Spurs could be the weakest of the seeds on account they're likely to do their usual and not give a toss). They can of course, at least on current seedings, get Legia Warsaw and Sion, which might be good for the lolz. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shootingboots Posted August 26, 2015 Share Posted August 26, 2015 So of the 4 teams in Europe, so far only Aberdeen have had a good result - by this I mean progressing by a team we're not expected to. Just like last season. When was the last time Celtic won a European tie they would not be favourites for btw? I can't think Of a good result since they beat Barca 5 years ago or whatever. They're pish in Europe. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.